National Intelligence Service female employee confirmed innocent for perjury

View of the Supreme Court. © News1

The NIS employee who was handed over to the trial for false testimony by attending the National Intelligence Service’s trial of the presidential intervention case was confirmed innocent.

The first division of the Supreme Court (Presiding Judge Kim Seon-eun) announced on the 29th that it has confirmed the court case for acquitting Kim Mo, who was accused of perjury.

Kim attended the trial of former NIS chief Won Se-hoon in September 2013 as a witness to the fact that the members of the cyber team of the NIS psychological fleet received direct comments from the top of the NIS in a way that they received daily “issues and arguments” through internal e-mail. Although he knew it, he was handed over to trial for false testimony as if he did not know it.

Earlier, on December 11, 2012, when members of the Democratic Unification Party raided an officetel in Gangnam, Seoul where NIS employees were making comments, and asked for evidence to be submitted, he refused to come out of the door and confronted the NIS employee. Became known.

Afterwards, Kim was accused of intervening in the presidential election, but was suspended from prosecution in June 2013.

The first trial judged that “It is difficult to conclude that Mr. Kim denied the existence of’issues and arguments’ or that he testified against objective truth or memory about the frequency and delivery method of oral instructions.” In addition, he was acquitted, saying, “I can’t find the motivation to risk perjury in the field where Mr. Kim stated that the psychological warfare’s cyber activities were directed by the head of the National Intelligence Service and others.”

2nd Depth also said, “I am not sure that the memories and testimony that Mr. Kim had in his head that day were false,” he said. “The newspaper reports and statements of the suspects prepared by the prosecution from the original heart were rejected because they were not written in an objective method. It is justified,” he said and maintained the judgment of the first trial.

[email protected]