Bribery Case Involving Police Official in CIO’s First Recognized Investigation Reduced to Suspended Sentence on Appeal

[Financial News] A former senior police officer accused of taking more than 700 million won in bribes had his first-trial acquittal overturned and received a reduced sentence on appeal.
On the 25th, the Criminal Division 3 of the Seoul High Court, presided over by Judge Lee Seunghan, overturned the lower court ruling and sentenced former Superintendent General Kim to one year in prison, suspended for two years, along with a forfeiture order of 110 million won on charges including bribery under the Act on the Aggravated Punishment of Specific Crimes and violations of the Improper Solicitation and Graft Act. The first trial had sentenced him to 10 years in prison, a fine of 1.6 billion won, and a forfeiture of about 750 million won, and he was taken into custody in court.
The appellate panel found Kim not guilty of receiving more than 600 million won in bribes through a borrowed-name bank account from A, the head of an apparel company. The court said the account listed in the indictment was not proven to be Kim’s actual borrowed-name account.
The panel noted, "It appears that the defendant managed the account to some extent and was involved in some deposits and withdrawals," but added, "It is difficult to conclude beyond a reasonable doubt that he fully controlled the account and used it solely at his own discretion for deposits and withdrawals."
However, Kim was found guilty of violating the Improper Solicitation and Graft Act by receiving credit cards and electronics worth a total of 110 million won from A.
The court nevertheless ruled him not guilty of bribery on this count, saying it was not proven that the items were given in return for asking him to arrange favors related to public duties.
The appellate panel said, "A may have had a vague expectation that he could receive help or avoid harm by getting on the defendant’s good side," but added, "Under the law, such a vague expectation alone does not constitute the crime of bribery for influence peddling."
Explaining the sentencing, the court criticized Kim, saying, "The defendant, a senior police official, transferred and used a credit card obtained from an acquaintance he had known for years and received electronics such as a laptop, taking valuables exceeding 3 million won each year over four fiscal years."
It continued, "This violates the purpose of the Improper Solicitation and Graft Act, which was enacted to sanction public officials’ receipt of money or valuables even when there is no direct connection to their duties or quid pro quo, in order to ensure integrity in public service and public trust in it," and added, "The nature of the crime is serious."
A, who was indicted alongside Kim, and an acquaintance accused of providing the borrowed-name account were all dismissed from prosecution.
The court pointed out that the CIO, which investigated the case, did not have the authority to indict or maintain prosecution against ordinary citizens who were neither high-ranking officials nor their family members.
It explained, "The prosecution against A and others, who are not high-ranking officials or family members as defined by the CIO Act, was filed by a CIO prosecutor without prosecutorial authority and is therefore invalid for violating legal provisions."
The court also found that some evidence was unlawfully collected because the rights of the person whose phone was seized were not guaranteed during the CIO’s confiscation process.
The CIO launched the investigation after probing allegations that Kim had taken bribes from Daewoo Development Chairman Lee Sang-young in exchange for helping to suppress a police investigation, and later found additional signs that he had also taken bribes from A. The investigation into those bribery allegations is still ongoing.

[email protected] Jung Kyung-soo Reporter