Court Administration Office▶ Click here for a larger view
The point to note in the court’s conviction of former judges’ guilty of’intervention in the trial’ is the recognition of conspiracy to commit crimes with the head of the judiciary.
In particular, Lee Gyu-jin, a former Supreme Court standing committee member, received and fulfilled “instructions” from former Supreme Court Chief Yang Seung-tae and former Deputy Chief Justice of the Court Administration Department Lim Jong-heon, but was subject to ex officio abuse and a legal dispute is expected in a future appeal trial.
According to law enforcement officials on the 24th, the 32nd Division of the Criminal Agreement of the Seoul Central District Court (Deputy Judge Yoon Jong-seop) sentenced the former permanent members to a one year and six months imprisonment and three years of probation for obstructing the exercise of the right to abuse of authority on the previous day.
He is accused of intervening in a lawsuit to confirm the status of former United Progressive Party local council members disbanded according to the decision of the Constitutional Court, and mobilizing dispatched judges to collect information inside the constitution.
The Ministry of Justice explained, “Even if you look at the constitution, the Court Organization Act, the rules of the court office, and various regulations, there is no prestigious provision that the court administration can perform the affairs that point out the fault of the judge in charge with respect to the core of the court affairs in a particular case.” did.
In the meantime, “If we observe the laws and systems comprehensively and practically, the Chief Justice of the Supreme Court and the court administration are responsible for judicial affairs in certain cases due to the interpretation of Articles 27 and 103 of the Constitution, Articles 9, 1 and 19, 2 of the Court Organization Act, the rules of the court office, and other regulations. “Intellectual affairs” can be performed on key areas,” he said.
This means that, unlike first-line court chiefs and judges, the Chief Justice of the Supreme Court and the court administration have the power to point out errors in individual trials, so if the Chief Justice of the Supreme Court and the court administration are involved in an unfair trial intervention, an ex officio abuse is committed.
In the end, it is interpreted that the ex officio abuse crime was applied to the former standing committee member by intervening in the trial under the direction of the former Chief Justice of the Supreme Court Yang Seung-tae and the court administration.
First conviction for’Jubeongdan’… Lee Min-girl and Lee Gyu-jin▶ Click here for a larger view
Previously, Lim Seong-geun, former head of the Busan High Court, was charged with intervening in the trial, including the case of defamation of former President Park Geun-hye of Sankei, the former head of the Seoul branch, but was acquitted on the grounds that’there is no ex officio abuse.’
However, the judiciary who heard the case of the former permanent member believes that the court administration has the authority to point out the judgment of the judge, so that the former permanent member also has the’ex officio’ which is the premise of the ex officio abuse.
However, the subject who can point out on the trial is limited to the Chief Justice of the Supreme Court and the Deputy Director and Deputy Director of the Court Administration, so the head of the Planning and Coordination Office of the Court Administration Office or the Standing Committee of the Supreme Court Sustainable Commission cannot be the direct subject of the affairs. did.
In the end, it was concluded that if the conspiracy relationship with the Chief Justice of the Supreme Court or the Deputy Chief of the Court Administration Office was admitted, the trial intervention could be punished for ex officio abuse.
Lee Min-geol, the former head of the Planning and Coordination Office of the Court Administration Office, who was also prosecuted, was acquitted of the charges of intervening in the trial for reasons such as that the public offering relationship was not recognized.
However, he tried to find out the trial of the Criminal Court where a member of the National Assembly Party was prosecuted through a public affairs judge in the front-line court, and was convicted of attempting to break down the International Human Rights Law Research Council, which is a research group of judges.
The judge admitted that Mr. Lee had ex officio to intervene in frontline public affairs and judge research meetings. In addition, in the process of attempting to break down the International Human Rights Law Research Council, it was judged that Mr. Lee conspired with the former Chief Justice of the Supreme Court Yang and Deputy Chief Lim.
This ruling is expected to be fierce in judicial battles over the appropriateness of the judgment of the judiciary in the trials of both former Supreme Court chiefs Yang, Park Byeong-dae, Ko Young-han, and former deputy chief of the court administration department, Lim Jong-heon, before the first trial decision.
As it is a new law that has not existed, it is also controversial whether it conforms to the guilt-criminal legalism that’crimes and punishments must be prescribed by law in advance.’
As expected of the controversy, the court also explained that “laws and institutions do not change at once, but gradually change over a considerable period of time,” and “the courts that interpret and apply the law should not miss the change.”
He added, “I think that the crime of obstruction of the exercise of the right to abuse of authority is often a problem during the period when new laws and institutions are in place in the process of major changes in laws and institutions.”
[연합뉴스]
Copyrights ⓒ Yonhap News. Unauthorized reproduction and redistribution prohibited