"If Helping a Candidate Lose Is the Primary Goal, It Is Not a Justifiable Act"... Daejinyeon's Conviction Finalized for Campaign Against Oh Se-hoon

[Financial News] The Supreme Court of Korea has ruled that even if an action was intended to raise allegations against a candidate, it cannot be considered a justifiable act that does not violate social norms if its primary purpose was to help the candidate lose.
According to legal sources on the 2nd, the Supreme Court of Korea, with Justice Eom Sang-pil serving as the reporting justice, dismissed all appeals filed by Defendant A and 15 other members of the University Students' Progressive Alliance, who had been indicted on charges of violating the Public Official Election Act. It upheld the lower court's ruling.
Members of the University Students' Progressive Alliance, also known as Daejinyeon, were indicted for repeatedly campaigning before the official campaign period by using pickets and banners to help defeat United Future Party candidate Oh Se-hoon, who was running in Gwangjin B, Seoul, in the April 2020 21st National Assembly election. Some were also accused of interfering with Oh's campaign on March 23, 2020, by surrounding him for about 20 minutes in the waiting area of a subway station in Gwangjin-gu, Seoul, while holding signs, shouting, and arguing with campaign workers. Prosecutors deemed the conduct pre-election campaigning and interference with the freedom of elections through improper means.
The key issue was whether the conduct qualified as a justifiable act. The defendants argued that they had merely expressed opinions about allegations that Oh had violated the Public Official Election Act and therefore had not violated social norms. For some defendants, the parties also disputed whether the individuals shown in the video footage were the defendants themselves and whether they had actually participated in the joint offenses.
The Seoul Eastern District Court, which heard the case at first instance, found most of the charges against the defendants proven. The Seoul High Court, acting as the appellate court, also ruled that the defendants' primary purpose had been to call for the defeat of a specific candidate and that their conduct risked undermining electoral fairness or causing excessive electioneering. It therefore held that the conduct could not be considered a justifiable act and upheld the first trial's conclusion.
However, the appellate court said it was difficult to conclude that one defendant had participated in the election interference and pre-election campaigning at the subway station on March 23, 2020. It additionally acquitted the defendant on those charges and reduced the punishment to a 1 million-won fine with a one-year suspension of execution. For another defendant, it upheld the guilty verdict but deferred sentencing on a 2.5 million-won fine, taking into account the defendant's limited involvement, status as a college freshman at the time, and lack of a prior criminal record. All appeals filed by the remaining defendants and the prosecution were dismissed.
The Supreme Court of Korea likewise accepted the facts and legal reasoning recognized by the lower courts. The panel stated, "The lower court's judgment contains no error that either exceeded the limits of the principle of free evaluation of evidence by violating the rules of logic and experience, or misunderstood the legal principles concerning justifiable acts that do not violate social norms, thereby affecting the judgment." Accordingly, except for the portions found not guilty by the appellate court, the convictions and sentences for violating the Public Official Election Act were finalized unchanged.
[email protected] Kim Dong-gyu Reporter