Suspicion of Lee Gyu-won’Illegal Withdrawal of Kim Hak’ …

Former Vice Minister of Justice Kim Hak-e is appearing as the Seoul East District Prosecutors’ Office. Reporter Lim Hyun-dong

It was found that the complaint and inspection against Prosecutor Lee Gyu-won, who was suspected of writing false official documents to ban Kim Hak-e’s former vice minister of the Ministry of Justice, had been in a state of reply until the end of two years of receipt.

According to the legal community on the 14th, Rep. Kwak Sang-do filed a complaint against the prosecutor in April 2019. It is said that the Blue House made a’planning assessment’ against former Vice Minister Kim, including the suspicion of creating a false official document by writing a fake internal company number in the’request for approval of the ban on departure’. This case was allocated to a research office of the Supreme Prosecutors’ Office 1 in June of last year.

However, the case was’closed’ in July, a month later. The Supreme Prosecutor’s Office explained that it was the result of Rep. Kwak’s complaint against this prosecutor in July 2019, the same month, for writing false official documents and events. Closing the public inspection is primarily a simple suspicion, and is a disposition in cases where it is judged that proper legal action cannot be taken. It is a sort of’dismissal’ that ends the case without further investigation. It means that the complaint has been filed for the same thing, so it will not be inspected.

A researcher affiliated with the Supreme Prosecutor’s Office 1 Division said, “The review has been considerably pending according to the progress of the disposition of the complaint case, and it is scheduled to be handled by referring to the progress of the investigation of the complaint case.”

Prosecutors’ complaints were reassigned to the same research office in August of last year only after Rep. Kwak sent a letter to Prosecutor General Yoon Seok-yeol once and two times to Prosecutor General Han Dong-soo. However, there is no known progress so far.

The problem is that the Supreme Prosecutor’s Office of the Supreme Prosecutors’ Office has also made little progress in the case of the complaint that was the reason for the’end of public inspection’. It is said that it was in September last year that the prosecution contacted Rep. Kwak. According to the’progress of disposition of the complaint case,’ the prosecutor’s complaint was said to have been terminated, but the complaint case was the first to contact the complainant after 1 year and 2 months.

Currently, Rep. Kwak, who has been subpoenaed two times (December 1st and January 12th of last year), has submitted a total of 30 related data to the Seoul Central District Prosecutor’s Office, Criminal Section 1 (Director Byun Pil-gun). It is said that the controversial public interest report was also verbally explained to the prosecutor in charge.

Lee Seong-yoon, Seoul Central District Prosecutor’s Office[뉴스1]

Inside the prosecution, criticism has emerged that prosecutors classified as’pro-government tendencies’ are intentionally crushing investigations and prosecution.

In particular, Seoul Central District Prosecutor’s Office Lee Seong-yoon, who is classified as a representative pro-government prosecutor, is also under suspicion of attempting concealment immediately after illegal withdrawal while working as the chief prosecutor’s anti-corruption/strong prosecutor. The next day after the withdrawal, a request was made to a senior official at the Seoul East District Prosecutor’s Office, saying that he had been rejected after requesting “the prosecutor to confirm the internal company number as confirmed”.

Criticism has also been raised for the reasons that the Supreme Prosecutor’s Office has ended the public inspection. One metropolitan prosecutor’s office said, “I suspect’selective inspection’,” he said. “If the central district prosecutor’s investigation is considered the reason for the closing of the public inspection, why did the investigation and inspection against Prosecutor Han Dong-hoon be conducted in parallel in the case of the suspicion of’prosecutors’ Earlier, when a prosecutor was overwhelmed by the suspicion of “probate confusion,” the then chief prosecutor at the time, Dong-su Han, informed the general public that he would “supervise prosecutor Han Dong-hoon” by text message, and the Ministry of Justice began to inspect it directly.

Another prosecutor’s executive raised his voice, saying, “I can’t understand the reason for’closing the public inspection’ even though there is no progress in the complaint case.”

Reporters Kim Su-min and Kang Kwang-woo [email protected]