'Kim & Chang of Seocho District' LKB also stepped in for Cho Kuk's daughter's case, which ended in conviction... Why was Han Dong-hoon's daughter's case not referred to prosecutors?

[Financial News] The family of former Justice Minister Cho Kuk and the family of independent lawmaker Han Dong-hoon, both of whom came under investigation over allegations related to their children's college admissions, have faced different investigation and trial outcomes, drawing attention to the legal differences between the two cases. Cho's case ended with his conviction upheld despite the efforts of a defense team from a major law firm, while the case involving Han's family was closed at the police investigation stage without being referred to prosecutors.
According to legal sources on the 1st, allegations that an earlier investigation related to the so-called “fabricated credentials” allegations involving the lawmaker's daughter was suppressed have again become the subject of an investigation. The key questions are the circumstances surrounding prosecutors' failure to forward to a higher authority the request for international mutual legal assistance made by police, and whether Han, who was justice minister at the time, was involved.
Law firm LKB & Partners (now LKB Pyeongsan), once dubbed “Kim & Chang of Seocho District,” joined the defense team in Cho's case. Along with Dasan Law Firm and others, LKB handled criminal cases involving Cho's family, and Cho's conviction was ultimately upheld.
In December 2024, the Supreme Court upheld Cho's two-year prison sentence on charges including admissions-related corruption involving his children and the suppression of an inspection by Cheong Wa Dae. Chung Kyung-sim, a former professor at Dongyang University, also had her four-year prison sentence upheld in January 2022 for admissions-related corruption involving her children and other offenses.
The core of the court's finding of guilt was the creation and actual submission of false admissions supporting documents, as well as obstruction of universities' admissions processes. The case went beyond controversy over the applicant's activity record: related criminal conduct was established at trial.
The case involving Han's daughter was different. Allegations were raised in 2022 over ghostwriting and plagiarism of papers, exaggeration of volunteer service records, and the creation and sale of e-books. After investigating for about 1 year and 8 months, police decided in December 2023 not to refer the case to prosecutors on 11 related charges, citing “no suspicion” and “no right to prosecute,” among other grounds.
The Massachusetts Institute of Technology (MIT), which admitted Han's daughter, reportedly said it would maintain its admission decision after reviewing information submitted regarding the allegations. However, the university's decision to uphold her admission does not establish the facts behind all the allegations or determine whether there was criminal liability.
According to police materials submitted to the National Assembly, police never applied for a search-and-seizure warrant in the investigation involving Han's family. The only questioning of a person named in the complaint appears to have been a written inquiry directed to attorney Jin Eun-jung, Han's spouse.
The request for international mutual legal assistance that police made to the Seoul Central District Prosecutors' Office in November 2022 to obtain materials located in the United States was also halted at the prosecution stage. Prosecutors cited insufficient justification for the need for cooperation and the likelihood of the U.S. side carrying it out, among other reasons for not forwarding the request.
Politicians have raised suspicions of a shoddy investigation, but some argue that the fact no search-warrant application was made is not, by itself, enough to conclude that the investigation was deliberately stifled. That is because the need for coercive investigative measures must be assessed based on each individual charge and the available evidence.
Han's side has countered that the case, already closed after a police investigation and an investigation-review process, is being brought up again for political reasons. The complainants, meanwhile, argue that further investigation is needed into why the request for international cooperation was halted at the prosecution stage. To date, there has been no public confirmation that Han was directly involved in that decision.
A lawyer who previously served as a chief prosecutor said, “Ultimately, what distinguishes the two cases is not simply the difference in the intensity of the investigations, but whether the false documents were actually submitted and whether evidence proving the alleged crimes was obtained.” The lawyer added, “However, whether the investigation in the case involving Han's daughter was sufficient to obtain that evidence is a question that must be answered through the investigation that has now begun.”
[email protected] Yu Seon-jun Reporter