Analysis False address issue haunt minister nominees
.jpg?w=728)
Foreign Minister nominee Kang Kyung-wha looks annoyed following questions from opposition lawmakers about her registration of a false residence, during her confirmation hearing at the National Assembly, June 7. / Korea Times photo by Shim Hyun-chul
What is false residence registration and why it matters
By Kim Rahn
Several of Moon Jae-in government’s top official nominees have been embroiled in false residence registration allegations.
Prime Minister Lee Nak-yon, Foreign Minister nominee Kang Kyung-wha and Fair Trade Commission (FTC) Chairman nominee Kim Sang-jo had falsely registered their addresses in the past and they admitted it.
The false residence registration has become a hot issue in their qualification during last week’s confirmation hearings, while it used to be a minor problem in the previous administrations, where government official nominees were caught in much more serious irregularities.
Rep. Ji Sang-wuk of the Bareun Party raises false address registration suspicions for Fair Trade Commission Chairman nominee Kim Sang-jo during a party meeting at the National Assembly, June 5. / Korea Times photo by Oh Dae-geun
What is a false residence registration?
According to law, people have to register their address with the regional authorities if they move to a new residence. If a person registers an address while not actually living there, it is false residence registration. Violators could face up to three years in jail or up to 10 million won in fines.
The regulation on false address registration was made in 1975 during the dictatorial regime of former President Park Chung-hee who took the power through a coup. It was aimed at controlling, managing and mobilizing citizens easily: the purpose of the law revision was stated as “matching up the residence on official documents with actual living place to reinforce security and effectively manage human resources in preparation of an all-out war.”
But in reality, many people have committed the “crime” despite the ban because it is difficult to crack down on the irregularity and most people, even if caught, get only light fines. Some have done so to send their children to a school they want when the school is in a different village, while others have done so to buy land or houses for speculation purposes.
In a poll by Realmeter on June 5, 29.3 percent of 8,327 respondents said they have registered their addresses falsely at least once. Another 10.9 percent also said they once considered it but did not do it.
People tend to be lenient toward false residence registration for children’s education purposes, but become strict when it is related to real estate speculation, especially when it was done by ranking officials or official nominees.
In 1993, President Kim Young-sam disclosed his wealth for the first time as a president and other high-profile officials followed suit. During the course, it was found that then health minister Park Yang-sil had her children register false addresses for real estate speculation, and she resigned only 10 days after being appointed. Afterward the law on public servants’ ethics was revised to oblige ranking public officials to make public their wealth.
In 2002 during a confirmation hearing, then Prime Minister-designate Chang Sang, nominated by former President Kim Dae-jung, showed no remorse about her wrongdoing. When a lawmaker asked a question about an apartment which she allegedly had bought for speculation, she answered proudly: “I haven’t lived there,” and “I even don’t know the address of the apartment.” Her answers in the nationally live broadcast hearing enraged people, and the National Assembly did not endorse her.
In 2005 during the Roh Moo-hyun administration, it was belatedly found that then-Deputy Prime Minister Lee Hun-jae and National Human Rights Commission Chairman Choi Young-do registered false addresses for speculation and obtained billions of won in profits. They attempted to gloss over the problem by making public apologies, but had to quit as public criticism did not die down.
During the Lee Myung-bak government, 18 ranking officials and official nominees were found to have registered false addresses, but 15 of them were appointed despite the row. President Lee himself had five false address registrations.
During the Park Geun-hye administration, 15 official nominees were under the suspicion but only three were dropped from being nominated. But they were eliminated because of other more serious irregularities such as embezzlement.
Lawmakers of the main opposition Liberty Korea Party put leaflets that read, “Against approving Prime Minister nominee Lee Nak-yon,” on their monitors before a plenary session to vote on the nomination of Lee at the Assembly, Seoul, May 31. Lee was embroiled in false address registration allegation, but the Assembly passed his nomination. / Yonhap
Calls grow for new criteria
As false residence registration is so rampant, people became relatively lenient to cases committed for children’s education purposes, and many ranking official nominees went through parliamentary hearings despite the allegations.
But it again became one of decisive factors in personnel affairs in the Moon government, mainly because of the President’s own promise to exclude those guilty of any of five corrupt practices from ranking posts ― tax evasion, military service evasion, false residence registration, real estate speculation and academic plagiarism.
Prime Minister Lee Nak-yon, Foreign Minister nominee Kang and FTC head nominee Kim Sang-jo fell short of the high criteria although the purposes of their false address registration were not real estate speculation and somewhat minor ones ― Lee Nak-yon’s wife, a former teacher, registered a false residence in an attempt to be assigned to a school of her choice in 1989; Kang did so to help her daughter enter a high school of her choice in 2000; and Kim Sang-jo did so for his wife’s anticancer treatment in a nearby hospital in 2002.
Because of these, public calls are growing to revise the law on false residence registration which does not reflect reality.
Konkuk University law professor Han Sang-hie criticized the law, which was made to better control the people, calling it “nationalistic and outdated.”
“We have the freedom to decide on our own abode according to the Constitution. Anybody can live where they want, and can have any place of their choice as their residence. If we expand the concept, it is a person’s freedom to have two separate places as his or her official and unofficial residences, each,” Han said.
But he said it is a different issue if someone violates another law by having two different residences as their official and unofficial ones.
“If someone engages in real estate speculation with two different addresses, the person can be punished according to speculation-related law. If someone sends their children to a school by taking advantage of the two different addresses, the person can be punished for violating the law on education,” Han said. “The regulation is for administrative convenience, not for the people.”