If a Campaign Manager Is Convicted of an Election Crime,
the Lawmaker's Election Is Invalidated
The former campaign manager for Shin Youngdae, a member of the Democratic Party of Korea, who was indicted for participating in manipulating opinion polls during the party's primary, has received a suspended prison sentence. As a result, Shin will lose his seat in the National Assembly. According to the Public Official Election Act, if a campaign manager is convicted of an election-related crime and receives a confirmed sentence of imprisonment or a fine of 3 million won or more, the election of the corresponding lawmaker is invalidated.
On January 8, the First Division of the Supreme Court (Presiding Justice Shin Sookhee) upheld the original verdict in the final appeal for Kang, who was charged with violating the Public Official Election Act and obstruction of business, confirming a sentence of one year in prison with a two-year suspension.
Kang was accused of delivering 15 million won in cash and about 100 mobile phones to Lee, the former secretary-general of the Gunsan Disabled Sports Association, around December 2023, about four months before the 22nd general election, and instructing duplicate responses in the Democratic Party's primary opinion poll for Gunsan, Gimje, and Buan-gap in North Jeolla Province. At that time, Shin narrowly defeated former lawmaker Kim Eui-gyeom by about 1% in the party primary and secured the nomination.
During the trial, Kang argued that the prosecution had no authority to directly investigate the case and that the indictment itself was unlawful. He also claimed that evidence, such as 99 mobile phones and response data from the candidate suitability survey, was collected illegally.
The district court ruled, "The crime was committed in an organized and premeditated manner, and Kang, who was responsible for overseeing operations, played a leading role in directing the offense," sentencing him to one year in prison with a two-year suspension. The appellate court also maintained the lower court's decision, stating, "This case is a serious violation of the intent of the Public Official Election Act."
The Supreme Court agreed with the lower courts' judgments. The panel stated, "There was no misunderstanding regarding the scope of crimes subject to prosecutorial investigation, the relevance of the search and seizure warrant, the exclusionary rule for illegally collected evidence, or the legal principles concerning violations of the Public Official Election Act due to bribery or inducement of interest in party primaries."
© The Asia Business Daily(www.asiae.co.kr). All rights reserved.
