Myeong Tae-gyun Says in Call, “Oh Se-hoon Is Timid and Knows Nothing”... Special Counsel Raises “Risk of Manipulation”

[Financial News] Attention is focused on whether recordings of past phone calls between Myeong Tae-gyun and his supporter Kim Han-jung, admitted as evidence in Seoul Mayor Oh Se-hoon’s appeal trial over allegations that he paid Myeong Tae-gyun’s opinion poll costs on his behalf, will become the trial’s “smoking gun” (decisive evidence). In the recording played in court, Myeong said, “Oh Se-hoon doesn’t know. He doesn’t need to know,” and “I have never received even 10 won,” statements that contradicted his previous claims. The special counsel, which has presented Myeong’s testimony as key evidence, countered that the defendant had selectively submitted the recordings and that even those files could have been edited or manipulated.
The Seoul High Court Criminal Division 7, presided over by Judge Koo Hoe-geun, held the fifth hearing on the 16th for Oh, former Seoul Deputy Mayor for Political Affairs Kang Cheol-won, and businessman Kim Han-jung, who face charges of violating the Political Funds Act.
Kim, known as a supporter of Oh, newly submitted recordings and transcripts of his phone calls with Myeong on the 11th. The special counsel objected to admitting them as evidence, citing the fact that only three recordings had been selected and submitted, as well as the possibility of manipulation. However, the trial panel admitted the recordings and transcripts as impeachment evidence at the hearing.
In court, approximately 18 minutes of key content from the phone recordings submitted by Kim’s side was played. In the recording, Myeong told Kim, “Oh Se-hoon doesn’t know, so don’t worry. I’ll take care of it,” and “It’s a simple matter, but Oh Se-hoon is really timid. He doesn’t even know why we have to do something like that.” These remarks contradicted the claim that Myeong met or spoke directly with Mayor Oh during the by-election, received an order to conduct an opinion poll, and that Oh was aware of the poll’s progress and directly discussed its costs.
Oh’s attorney argued, “It has been proven that the opinion poll was not commissioned or paid for on Oh’s request,” challenging the first trial court’s finding of a conspiracy to make the payment on his behalf.
The special counsel, however, focused on the possibility that the evidence had been contaminated. The prosecution countered, “Of the 35 recordings, only the three favorable to the defendant were selectively submitted, and he is refusing to submit the mobile phone,” adding, “The third file shows signs of having been modified in November 2024, when media reports emerged, so the risk of editing is substantial.”
Despite the special counsel’s objection, the trial panel admitted the recordings as impeachment evidence. The dispute over the credibility of the “secret recordings” has emerged as a new issue in the appellate trial ahead of next month’s ruling.
The trial panel plans to hold a final hearing at 2 p.m. on October 2 to hear the defendants’ final statements and the special counsel’s sentencing recommendation before closing the proceedings.
[email protected] Chang-hoon Lee Reporter