[Exclusive] Prosecution Also Files Appeal in Sang Byunheon Sejong City Council Case

The Principle of Prohibition of Unfavorable Changes
Does Not Apply Due to Appeals by Both Parties

Daejeon District and High Court Building. / Photo by Kim Giwan, Chungcheong News Headquarters

As the appellate trial for Sang Byunheon, a member of the Sejong City Council affiliated with the Democratic Party of Korea, is set to proceed, it has recently been confirmed that the prosecution has also filed an appeal.

Sang, who was sentenced to one year and six months in prison and ordered to complete 40 hours of a sexual violence treatment program by the first-instance court on July 24, after the prosecution had sought a two-year prison term on charges of forcible molestation and false accusation, immediately filed an appeal following the verdict. He was not taken into custody at the time of sentencing, allowing him to prepare for the appellate trial without detention.

The background to Sang's appeal reportedly lies in the failure to reach a settlement with the victims. The appeal is understood to be aimed at achieving a settlement in order to seek a reduction in his sentence.

In this context, Asia Economy has confirmed that the prosecution also recently submitted a notice of appeal to the court. As a result, both parties will proceed with an appellate trial.

Unlike Sang, who only submitted a notice of appeal, the Criminal Division of the Daejeon District Prosecutors' Office submitted both a notice of appeal and a statement of reasons for appeal to the court. Since both parties have appealed, the principle prohibiting unfavorable changes for the defendant in appellate court does not apply to Sang. In other words, if Sang, as the defendant, had appealed alone, this principle would have prevented the appellate court from imposing a heavier sentence than that of the first-instance court. This is stipulated in Article 368 of the Criminal Procedure Act.

However, because the prosecution has also appealed, this principle does not apply in the appellate trial where both parties have appealed. According to legal experts, when both parties appeal, the 'principle of prohibition of unfavorable changes' does not apply, making changes to the sentence possible.

A legal expert explained, "The prosecution requested a two-year prison sentence, and the first-instance court sentenced him to one year and six months. In fact, since the sentence was not significantly lower than what the prosecution requested, it is uncommon for the prosecution to appeal in such cases. In this case as well, it cannot be said that the sentence was much lower than the prosecution's request. Nevertheless, the prosecution's decision to appeal appears to be aimed at ensuring that the principle prohibiting unfavorable changes does not apply." The expert added, "Since the prosecution submitted a statement of reasons for appeal along with the notice of appeal, it is possible that additional evidence may be presented to the appellate court."

Meanwhile, it has been reported that the appellate court panel for Sang's case has not yet been determined.