Supreme Court Overturns Acquittal and Orders Retrial
The Supreme Court has ruled that a police officer who accessed the case records of his son, who had been sued, and told him, "There is no talk of detention, so don't worry," is guilty of leaking official secrets.
According to the legal community on August 1, the Supreme Court's Second Division (Presiding Justice Eom Sang-pil) recently overturned part of a lower court's acquittal of Mr. Lee, who was indicted on charges of abuse of authority and leaking official secrets, and remanded the case to the Uijeongbu District Court.
Mr. Lee, who was serving as an internal affairs inspector at a police station in Gyeonggi Province in September 2020, was accused of receiving the case records of his son, who had been sued for fraud, from an administrative officer in the same station's investigation department. He reviewed the prosecutor's investigation directive and told his son that there were no instructions regarding detention or other custody measures. He was indicted for this. It was found that, after hearing from his son that "the complainant posted on an online forum that I would soon be detained," Mr. Lee checked the case records and told his son, "No detention warrant has been issued, and there is no mention of detention in the prosecutor's directive, so you have nothing to worry about."
The first and second trial courts acquitted Mr. Lee, stating that his remarks were unrelated to the contents of the investigation directive and could not be considered a leak of investigative circumstances. They also found that even if the information were disclosed, it was unlikely to interfere with the purpose of the investigation.
However, the Supreme Court's judgment differed. The bench stated, "The fact that the prosecutor did not issue any investigation directives regarding the request for a detention warrant or other custody measures is information from which one can sufficiently infer the prosecutor's opinion on whether to pursue detention. Therefore, it cannot be said that this information is unrelated to the contents of the investigation directive."
The bench also pointed out, "The defendant, as a police officer, received the case records of his own son, who was under investigation at his police station, reviewed the contents of the investigation directive, and informed his son. This, in itself, undermines the fairness and credibility of the investigation and raises concerns about hindering the proper exercise of criminal justice."
However, the Supreme Court rejected the prosecutor's appeal regarding the charge of abuse of authority and confirmed Mr. Lee's acquittal on that count.
© The Asia Business Daily(www.asiae.co.kr). All rights reserved.
