The Supreme Prosecutors’ Office announced on the 7th that it ordered the Seoul Central District Prosecutors’ Office to confirm the facts of the report on the investigation to the Seoul Central District Prosecutors’ Office (Director Byun Pil-Geon) and Suwon District Prosecutors’ Office 3 (Director Lee Jeong-seop). Part 1 of the Seoul Central District Prosecutor’s Office detects false preparation and leakage of’Yoon Jung-cheon interview report’ by the 2019 Supreme Prosecutors’ Past Photographic Investigation Group and allegations of the Blue House’s planning affairs, and Part 3 of the Suwon District Prosecutor’s Office is an illegal emergency ban (withdrawal) and investigation by former Vice Minister Kim Hak-eui The suspicion of external pressure is being investigated.
This is because Justice Minister Park Beom-gye placed a stern remark on the previous day (6th), saying, “We cannot condone the publicity of the accusations.” Criticism has emerged that the legal profession is using the standard of publicizing the accusation as’selective’ only in cases involving the Blue House.
Two incidents subject to fact-finding, possible involvement of the Blue House
Justice Minister Park Beom-gye warned about reports related to the investigation of various allegations of misconduct during the 2019 Great Sword Past Photo Investigation Group, which was suspected of involving Lee Gwang-cheol, the Blue House Civil Service Secretary, “It is impossible to condone due to the public announcement of the charges.” It was announced that they ordered the Seoul Central District Prosecutors’ Office and Suwon District Prosecutors’ Office to check the facts, respectively. The photo shows the Seoul Central District Prosecutors’ Office (left) and the Seoul Central District Prosecutor’s Office in Seocho-dong. yunhap news
The two cases that were the subject of’confirmation of the truth’ are those with a high possibility of involvement by Lee Gwang-cheol, the Blue House Civil Affairs Secretary (at the time, the senior administrative officer). It is believed that the Seoul Central District Prosecutor’s Office Criminal Section 1, at the time when the’Interview Report with Yoon Jung-cheon’ was written, made a phone call with this secretary whenever Prosecutor Lee Gyu-won, a member of the Supreme Prosecutor’s Office, interviewed Mr. Yoon Jung-cheon.
Suwon District Prosecutor’s Office Criminal Division 3 reported that Cha Gyu-geun, head of the Immigration and Foreigners Policy Headquarters of the Ministry of Justice, spoke with the prosecutor on March 22, 2019 with the introduction of the secretary, and later approved the prosecutor’s request for an emergency withdrawal from former Vice Minister Kim. It is prying whether to intervene in the Blue House. This secretary was in charge of investigating the facts of the prosecution’s past in the Civil Affairs Office of the Blue House at the time.
Minister Park doubted the prosecution’s public announcement of the charges, and said, “We know that there will be a measure for the Seoul Central District Prosecutors’ Office as the Great Swordsman, and we are looking forward to it.” Concerned about the contraction of the investigation by this measure, he said, “If the investigation technique is poor, including the publication of the suspected fact, there is no reason to feel it as external pressure.”
A key member of the Blue House said, “It was confirmed that Gwang-cheol Lee at the time was not involved in the reporting process for (the activity of the Supreme Prosecutors’ Office).” He was putting a brake on the report of the incident.
Park Jun-young “Silence during’live broadcast’ of the judicial nongdan investigation”
Attorney Park Joon-young (pictured) participated in the investigation of the sexual entertainment of the villa by former Vice Minister of Justice Kim Hak-eui in the 2019 Supreme Prosecutors’ Past Photographic Investigation Team. yunhap news
The Seoul Central District Prosecutors’ Office and Suwon District Prosecutors’ Office of the Human Rights Supervisory Office were in charge of the investigation of the investigation-related reports under the orders of the Ministry of Justice and the Supreme Prosecutors’ Office. Each agency’s human rights inspector’s office is planning to check whether the Supreme Prosecutors’ Office on the 26th of last month violated the’strict compliance instructions such as regulations on the prohibition of disclosure of criminal cases’ to the front-line district prosecutors’ office on the 26th of last month. Although it is not an inspection for disciplinary purposes against the investigation team, it is actually an investigation that is comparable to the inspection. Minister Park warned the day before that “we will confirm our own investigation and consider follow-up measures.”
There are criticisms in the legal community that the application of the accusation of the suspect is being carried out with the’rubber band standard’. Attorney Park Joon-young, who was part of the prosecution fact-finding team, said on Facebook that day, “There were quite a bit of irresponsible dissemination related to the investigation of the past during the investigation. At that time, the ruling party, the Ministry of Justice, and the Blue House did not express any regrets to the investigation team. It was because it was a report that was favorable to this regime,” he wrote.
Attorney Park said, “In the 2017 and 2018 judicial Nongdan investigation process, the investigation was reported to the media as if it was broadcast live, but it was also silent at this time. Everyone knows how the silent people reacted to the investigation of former Minister Cho Kuk in 2019,” he said. “After a long silence, the fierce opposition is a contradiction that reflects the political position and the camp’s logic.”
he is “The principle of prohibiting the public announcement of suspected matters is sometimes silent, sometimes without a principle, depending on various interests.”He pointed out, “It is also a problem that the power-type investigation is broadcast live, but we also need a countermeasure to proceed in the blink of an eye.” “With the structure of the formation of public opinion in our society where the results of investigation and trial are quoted and interpreted according to various interests such as camp logic It is not advisable to only try to control the investigation information of power-type cases.”He added.
Park Beom-gye,’Narrow Nambul’, said, “It wasn’t spectacular then.”
Justice Minister Park Beom-gye suspects that reports of investigations aimed at passports in relation to the activities of the Past Photographic Investigation Team of the Supreme Prosecutors’ Office in 2019 have nothing to do with the 4/7 re-election. The photo shows Minister Park going to work at the Ministry of Justice in the Gwacheon Government Complex on the morning of the 1st. News 1
Minister Park refuted, saying, “I wasn’t the (Justice) Minister at that time (2017~2019).” He visited the press room of the Ministry of Justice on that day and said, “It is difficult to say that the publicity of the charges is not consistent since we have spoken often since the opposition party before becoming minister.”
However, there are also criticisms that Park has consistently shown a selective attitude since taking office. One prosecution officer “Why aren’t the public prosecutors’ general prosecutor general’s mother-in-law case, Channel A case, and former Prime Minister Han Myung-sook’s illegal political funding case publicized during the investigation and directing the investigation?”Said. Another incumbent prosecutor emphasized the principle of prohibiting the disclosure of criminal cases only in power-type cases while keeping the structure that allowed the prosecution to voluntarily publicize the public by blocking access to information related to the investigation, “To curb only the reports of living power investigations. I was concerned.
Reporters Ha Jun-ho and Kim Soo-min [email protected]
