Yoon loses appeal in election law case, putting PPP campaign reimbursement at risk
People watch a televised broadcast of the appellate ruling in former President Yoon Suk Yeol’s election law case, on a screen at Seoul Station in Seoul, Wednesday. Newsis
Conservative party faces possible $30 mil. repayment if conviction stands
An appellate court on Wednesday upheld a lower court's conviction of former President Yoon Suk Yeol for making false statements during his 2022 presidential campaign. If the ruling becomes final, it could require the main opposition People Power Party (PPP) to repay 39.7 billion won ($30 million) in campaign reimbursements.
The Seoul High Court upheld the lower court’s sentence of 18 months in prison, suspended for three years, over statements Yoon made before his election in March 2022.
“By making false statements during the campaign, he infringed on voters’ right to make an informed decision and undermined the fairness of the election and the integrity of the electoral process,” judge Baek Seung-yeop said.
The verdict leaves the party facing a substantial financial liability, although the repayment obligation depends on the conviction becoming final.
Under the election law, presidential candidates who win or receive at least 15 percent of the vote qualify for full reimbursement of eligible campaign expenses. But the funds must be returned if a candidate receives a prison sentence or a fine of 1 million won or more for election law violations and the conviction becomes final.
The charges stemmed from the prosecutor-turned-politician’s campaign remarks about a lawyer he introduced to a former tax official, and his own personal ties with shaman Jeon Seong-bae, also known as Geonjin.
At a Kwanhun Club debate on Dec. 14, 2021, Yoon denied introducing a lawyer to Yoon Woo-jin, a former head of the Yongsan District Tax Office. The court found, however, that he had connected the former tax official with Lee Nam-seok, a lawyer who had also served in the Supreme Prosecutors’ Office’s Central Investigation Department, when Yoon headed a division within the department in 2012.
“Whether the defendant had introduced a lawyer to Yoon Woo-jin was important in terms of assessing the defendant’s integrity and impartiality as a public official, given allegations that he had exerted influence in Yoon Woo-jin’s bribery case. Making false statements on the matter was therefore a serious offense,” the judge said.
In a media interview on Jan. 17, 2022, Yoon also claimed that a party official had introduced him to Jeon and denied meeting the shaman together with his wife, Kim Keon Hee.
“This information could help voters assess whether a candidate might be susceptible, even to a small degree, to influence from unofficial channels,” the judge said. “Yet the defendant made false statements about how his relationship with Jeon began and whether he and his wife had met him together … His conduct therefore warrants strong censure.”
The court concluded that both accounts were false and that Yoon knew they were untrue.
The court said judges should not give too much weight to consequences such as overturning an election result when deciding a sentence. How the law links criminal penalties to those consequences is a matter for lawmakers, it said, and should not distort sentencing decisions.
It also rejected the argument that Yoon’s sentence was too harsh, finding that the lower court had acted within its reasonable discretion.
After the ruling, Yoon’s lawyers said they would appeal to the Supreme Court.