ED Prosecutors abandon their duty
Justice Minister Jung Sung-ho enters the ministry building in Seoul, Monday. Yonhap
Prosecution should serve justice, not power
Controversy is flaring as the prosecution has abandoned its duty to appeal a district court’s ruling acquitting five defendants of breach of trust and conflict of interest charges in connection with the massive Daejang-dong urban redevelopment project in Seongnam, Gyeonggi Province.
The five defendants, including Yoo Dong-kyu, former executive of the Seongnam Development Corporation, and Nam Wook, a former lawyer for President Lee Jae Myung, were key private partners in the controversial land development project launched in 2015.
Initially, prosecutors sought to confiscate 781.4 billion won ($537 million) out of the 787.8 billion won in profits generated in what has become widely known as the “Daejang-dong scandal.” However, the court ordered the confiscation of only 47.2 billion won.
Because the prosecution opted not to appeal, the five defendants will be able to keep the bulk of their gains from the public-private partnership. Critics are describing it as a situation in which criminals have effectively been given the green light to keep money earned through corruption.
The prosecution’s dereliction of duty has sent shockwaves throughout the nation. Lee himself is entangled in a separate legal case stemming from the same project, which began during his tenure as mayor of Seongnam. Lee faces charges of breach of trust and conflict of interest — the same allegations the district court just dismissed.
The case against Lee has been suspended since his win in the snap presidential election on June 3, and will resume again once he leaves office. Given that the five defendants were already cleared of identical charges, it appears highly likely that Lee, too, will be acquitted if his trial resumes.
Because of Lee’s alleged involvement, critics have claimed the Seoul Central District Prosecutors’ Office made the decision not to appeal as a calculated act of protection for the sitting president ahead of his future legal battles.
The prosecution’s inaction has backfired, leaving the institution besieged and under fire.
In a strongly worded statement, Han Dong-hoon, former chairman of the main opposition People Power Party, lashed out at prosecutors for dereliction of duty.
“The prosecution should have appealed immediately after the ruling. This is a duty, not an option,” he wrote on social media.
Han alleged that the Seoul Central District Prosecutors’ Office’s decision was the result of collusion among multiple state institutions. “The presidential office, the Supreme Prosecutors’ Office, the Ministry of Justice and the Seoul Central District Prosecutors’ Office — they were all involved. Those responsible must be held accountable and sent to jail,” he said.
The fallout triggered infighting within the prosecution, as blame was tossed in every direction and some prosecutors began taking action.
Rank-and-file prosecutors accused the leadership of making a “toxic decision” to forgo confiscation of criminal proceeds. On the prosecution’s internal intranet, one mid-career prosecutor wrote that the district court had cleared the five defendants of conflict of interest charges based solely on reasoning drawn from previous cases, allowing them to evade confiscation of their illicit assets.
“Worse, by abandoning its duty to appeal, the prosecution has lost the opportunity for further deliberation by a higher court,” he wrote.
High-ranking officials rushed to defend the institution. In a statement released Monday, Justice Minister Jung Sung-ho said the prosecution should steer clear of political cases and called for reform within the organization.
Jung Jin-woo, head of the Seoul Central District Prosecutors’ Office, offered to resign, claiming he had urged an appeal but was ignored by the Supreme Prosecutors’ Office.
“I felt I had to respect the final decision made by the Supreme Prosecutors’ Office, but I am resigning to make clear that I opposed it,” he said in a statement.
Noh Man-seok, the acting prosecutor general, defended the decision, saying the prosecution had carefully reviewed the ruling and consulted with district leadership before deciding not to appeal. He maintained that the decision was justified.
However, criticism has not subsided. Heads of district prosecutors’ offices issued a joint statement demanding Noh explain in detail why he ordered the Seoul office to halt consideration of an appeal.
The prosecution’s inaction has exposed an ugly reality. Not one prosecutor has stepped forward to take responsibility for this debacle.
In Korea, prosecutors are often compared to swords, thought of as weapons meant to strike down wrongdoing. But their collective silence and the dysfunction it revealed have once again proven that the prosecution stands not with justice, but with those in power.