Acting Prosecutor General Lee Jung-hyun: “I never even brought up dropping President Lee’s charges ... I never considered it”

[Financial News] Lee Jung-hyun, acting prosecutor general and deputy chief prosecutor of the Public Prosecution Office, said he had never considered withdrawing the indictments in criminal cases involving President Lee Jae Myung. Regarding remarks he made on his first commute to work on the 23rd of last month—when he said, “I think we’ll have to look at the results of the fact-finding investigation,” prompting controversy over whether he had left open the possibility of pursuing withdrawal of the indictments—he explained that he had been “expressing an extremely general position.”
When Kwak Kyu-taek of the People Power Party asked at the National Assembly Legislation and Judiciary Committee’s audit of the Public Prosecution Office on the 22nd whether he had left open the possibility of withdrawing the indictments, the acting prosecutor general replied, “What I said during the doorstep interview at the time was that, since the Ministry of Justice’s Committee on Respect for Human Rights in Prosecution and the Future (Future Committee) was conducting a fact-finding investigation, we should wait and see the results. That was a general position,” adding, “I had not considered it, and no other intention was involved at all.”
He also denied having issued any instructions. When Kim Han-kyu of the Democratic Party of Korea asked whether he had ever received a request from the president or the Ministry of Justice to consider withdrawing the indictments in cases involving President Lee or the Moon Jae-in administration, he answered, “No.” Asked whether he had instructed or consulted with the heads of metropolitan or regional public prosecution offices about considering withdrawal of the indictments, he said, “I have never even uttered the first syllable of the word for withdrawing an indictment.” Asked whether anyone had made such a request over lunch, he said, “No one said anything of the sort.”
Asked whether he would comply if President Lee requested withdrawal of the indictments, he replied, “I am not a political prosecutor, and I believe black must not be made white,” adding, “I will handle cases fairly according to principle and evidence, regardless of anyone’s rank or status.” Asked whether an indictment withdrawn under pressure could be brought again after a change of administration, he said, “It is legally possible.”■ Five suspended trials at the center of the controversy ... indictments can be withdrawn in only threeThe controversy over withdrawing indictments concerns five criminal cases in which President Lee was indicted and stood trial before proceedings were suspended. In the Public Official Election Act case involving the publication of false information, he was indicted in September 2022 and sentenced at first instance in November 2024 to one year in prison, suspended for two years. He was acquitted on appeal in March last year. In May last year, the Supreme Court’s Grand Bench overturned the ruling and remanded the case with instructions to find him guilty; it is now pending before Criminal Division 7 of the Seoul High Court. In the perjury-subornation case, in which he was indicted in October 2023, he was acquitted at first instance in November 2024, and the appeal is now being heard by Criminal Division 3 of the Seoul High Court.
The other three cases are at the first-instance stage. The Daejang-dong and Wirye New Town development corruption cases and the Seongnam Football Club sponsorship funds case were indicted in March 2023, while the Baekhyeon-dong development corruption case was indicted in October that year; they were consolidated at Criminal Division 33 of the Seoul Central District Court. The Ssangbangwool North Korea remittance case, in which he was indicted in June 2024, and the Gyeonggi Province corporate card misuse case, in which he was indicted in November 2024, are being handled by Criminal Division 11 of the Suwon District Court.
The five cases were suspended one after another, beginning when the hearing date for the perjury-subornation appeal was deferred in May last year. On June 9 last year, the court hearing the remanded election-law case deferred setting a date, citing Article 84 of the Constitution, which provides for the president’s immunity from criminal prosecution. It was the first time a court had interpreted this provision. A hearing date in the corporate card case was deferred on July 1 last year, and one in the North Korea remittance case was deferred on the 22nd of the same month.
Under the law, only the three cases at the first-instance stage are eligible for withdrawal of the indictment. Article 255(1) of the Criminal Procedure Act of the Republic of Korea provides that an indictment may be withdrawn before the first-instance judgment is pronounced. This means the indictments cannot be withdrawn in the Public Official Election Act and perjury-subornation cases, in which first-instance judgments have already been issued. If an indictment is withdrawn, the court dismisses the prosecution by a ruling under Article 328(1) of the same act, and the case may be prosecuted again under Article 329 only if other important evidence is discovered.
The Future Committee’s fact-finding team is investigating 19 allegations of human rights violations and abuse of authority by prosecutors. Eight of those cases involve President Lee, who was indicted in them or is directly or indirectly connected to them. On the 15th, the team made its first report on three cases: development corruption in Wirye New Town, the shooting of a government official in the Yellow Sea, and allegations of statistical manipulation under the Moon Jae-in administration. The Future Committee called for further investigation. The acting prosecutor general acknowledged receiving the report, but did not answer when asked whether it had found no illegality, saying the investigation was ongoing.■ State Council attendance: “I’ll convey concerns to the Ministry of Justice”The attendance of heads of investigative and prosecutorial bodies at State Council meetings also became an issue. When Yoon Sang-hyun of the People Power Party pointed out that regular attendance by the head of the Public Prosecution Office could undermine its independence, the acting prosecutor general replied, “State Council meetings are broadcast live to the entire country,” adding, “I have attended several times, but I have never once mentioned a specific case, and I have no intention of doing so.” He also said, “I will make sure the concern that the head of the Public Prosecution Office’s attendance at State Council meetings could compromise fairness and neutrality is conveyed through the Ministry of Justice.”
In response to Kim Han-kyu’s question about whether the president had ever directed the handling of a specific case at a State Council meeting, he said, “That has never happened, not once at any meeting I attended.” Kim Ji-hoon, head of the Serious Crime Investigation Agency, and Kim Jongcheol, acting commissioner of the Korean National Police Agency, also attended the State Council meeting on the 20th.
The acting prosecutor general also rebutted the criticism that he was a “political prosecutor.” When Kim Min-jeon of the People Power Party brought up the investigation into the Channel A prosecutor-journalist collusion case, he said, “In 29 years as a prosecutor, I have never handled a case by treating black as white,” adding, “I accept the criticism that I failed to uncover the facts because of a lack of ability, but I cannot agree with the criticism that I am a political prosecutor.”
[email protected] Kim Dong-kyu Reporter