Three Different Verdicts in One 'Myeong Tae-gyun Poll' Case... A Closer Look
- Input
- 2026-07-23 15:35:55
- Updated
- 2026-07-23 15:35:55
While the verdicts of First Lady Kim Kun-hee and Mr. Myeong, who were the first to be acquitted, had solidified as the prevailing consensus, the situation appears to have reversed as both former President Yoon Suk-yeol and Seoul Mayor Oh Se-hoon were found guilty. With the Supreme Court’s final ruling on First Lady Kim Kun-hee scheduled for the 24th, the legal community predicts that these rulings will have an impact. According to the legal community on the 23rd, judgments within the court regarding the same ‘Myeong Tae-gyun Poll’ case are conflicting. Even though each court is making an independent judgment, the legal community could not hide its bewilderment at the stark divergence in their rulings.
Kim as a "joint perpetrator of the Political Funds Act. " This was because Mrs. Kim directly communicated with Mr. Myung and conveyed the details to former President Yoon. There were also differences in how they judged Mr.
Myung's act of providing public opinion polls. In Mrs. Kim's trial, Mr. Myung's provision of polls was viewed as part of "Mr. Myung's business activities," whereas in former President Yoon's trial, it was judged as an "implicit agreement between former President Yoon and his wife and Mr.
Myung. " The court viewed Mayor Oh's role as that of former President Yoon rather than Mrs. Kim. Mayor Oh was viewed as the "key man" who personally orchestrated this incident. According to the ruling in Mayor Oh's first trial, the 22nd Criminal Division of the Seoul Central District Court (Presiding Judge Cho Hyung-woo) sentenced Mayor Oh, who is charged with violating the Political Funds Act, to a fine of 10 million won the previous day, explaining that "Mayor Oh directly commissioned Mr.
Myung to conduct the opinion poll and instructed him to make the payment on his behalf. " Ultimately, it is interpreted that indirect and circumstantial evidence, rather than direct evidence, played a significant role in the guilty verdicts of the two individuals. It was also emphasized that both had political motives in terms of motivation. It is stated that former President Yoon agreed to undergo the opinion poll to influence lawmakers and party members, given that he was competing fiercely with Hong Joon-pyo, the then-candidate of the People Power Party. The explanation is that Mayor Oh also had a political motive, stating that he commissioned the poll against candidate Na Kyung-won ahead of the Seoul mayoral primary to overcome his diminished standing within the party following his defeats in the parliamentary and party leader elections.
Regarding Mrs. Kim, the possibility that she conducted the opinion poll to expand Mr. Myung's political influence could not be ruled out, and her motives were not viewed separately. The legal community predicted that the Supreme Court would inevitably have to refer to these conflicting judgments. The argument is that although the Supreme Court acts as a court of law and makes only legal judgments, it must sort things out because the rulings on the same case diverged in the first trial.
Attorney B, a former presiding judge, emphasized, "The Supreme Court has no choice but to refer to the cases of Mrs. Kim, former President Yoon, and Mayor Oh," adding, "Since the judgments diverged in the lower courts of criminal cases, the Supreme Court will make a ruling to bring order. The fact that the sentencing was postponed once likely had an even greater impact. " A lawyer in Seocho-dong asserted, "It will definitely be resolved because it will affect the upcoming appeals and Supreme Court appeals for the cases of former President Yoon and Mayor Oh, and because it will set a precedent regarding the Political Funds Act.
"
[email protected] Jeong Gyeong-su Reporter