Jeong Jin-woo, the chief prosecutor of the Seoul Central District Prosecutors' Office, seen in Seoul on November 9th, a day after he offered his resignation over the decision to forgo appeal in the Daejang-dong case. Yonhap News. 

The repercussions of forgoing the appeal in the Daejang-dong case, considered the largest fraud case in Korean history and strongly suspected of involving Lee Jae-myung, continue to spread unabated. 

The investigative team, which sharply criticized the decision on the 7th as midnight struck, is strongly protesting that the prosecution's decision to drop the appeal, under the Ministry of Justice's directive, has resulted in private developers profiting hundreds of billions of won in criminal proceeds. 

The prosecutors involved in the investigation are strongly demanding the resignations of the Minister of Justice and the prosecution's top leadership, mirroring the public outcry demanding Lee Jae-myung's resignation. 

Kim Young-seok, a prosecutor at the Supreme Prosecutors' Office's Audit and Inspection Division 1, wrote on the internal prosecution network "ePros" on the 9th, questioning, "Has there ever been a precedent in the history of the prosecution where an appeal was dropped in a case where some defendants were acquitted and enormous amounts of forfeiture were not ordered?" 

According to a Yonhap News report that day, Prosecutor Kim pointed out, "The first-instance court acquitted the defendants of violating the conflict of interest prevention law based solely on similar case precedents, and did not order forfeiture." He added, "By dropping the appeal, we have lost the opportunity to receive a higher court's judgment on the crucial issues of violating the conflict of interest prevention law, such as the timing of acquiring financial gains."

Previously, the Seoul Central District Prosecutors' Office did not appeal the first-instance ruling against Kim Man-bae and other members of the 'Daejang-dong group.' All five defendants appealed. Under the Criminal Procedure Act, if only the defendants appeal, the principle of 'no unfavorable modification' prevents a harsher sentence from being imposed. Criticism immediately poured in that this decision significantly benefited the private developers of Daejang-dong, who were indicted on charges of recouping illicit gains. Amidst suspicions that Lee Jae-myung is behind the private developers who gained immense profits, criticism is rapidly spreading that the prosecution has acted in an incomprehensible manner. 

The forfeiture of criminal proceeds generated from the Daejang-dong development corruption is also likely to be significantly reduced due to the dropped appeal. Legal circles predict that these funds will effectively be unrecoverable. 

Previously, the prosecution demanded the forfeiture of all 788.6 billion won in illicit profits obtained by the defendants in the first instance. However, the first-instance court only ordered the forfeiture of 47.332 billion won in bribes, citing reasons such as the impossibility of accurately calculating the amount of damages. Consequently, public opinion is rapidly souring against the Lee Jae-myung administration and the prosecution, questioning whose interests the dropped appeal served. 

Regardless of the outcome of the second trial, the upper limit for the forfeiture of criminal proceeds has now been capped at 47.3 billion won. 

In response, Prosecutor Kim stated, as reported by Yonhap News, "I cannot understand what criteria the Deputy Prosecutor General considered so comprehensively late on Friday, nor why the Chief Prosecutor of the Seoul Central District Prosecutors' Office reversed the decision after 11:30 PM on Friday, despite having approved the appeal committee's recommendation for an appeal by the investigative and trial teams. On November 8, 2024, at midnight, the prosecution, and the truth, died." 

Typically, regarding sentencing outcomes, the prosecution analyzes the acquitted portions and sentencing, and after going through an appeal committee, submits an opinion supporting the appeal along with materials checking the appropriateness of the appeal for approval.

He added, "When I was a newly appointed prosecutor at the Legal Research and Training Institute, our professor, who was the Chief Prosecutor of the Seoul Central District Prosecutors' Office, told us, who were about to move to our first posts, 'If you wear a hat bigger than your head, your eyes will be blinded.' Have the Deputy Prosecutor General, the Head of the Anti-Corruption Department, and the Chief Prosecutor of the Seoul Central District Prosecutors' Office had their eyes blinded by wearing hats bigger than their heads?" he criticized.

Jeong Jin-woo, the chief prosecutor of the Seoul Central District Prosecutors' Office, answers questions from lawmakers at a plenary session of the National Assembly's Legislation and Judiciary Committee on the 23rd. Yonhap News.  

Kang Baek-shin, a prosecutor at the Daegu High Prosecutors' Office who led the Daejang-dong case investigation and trial team, also voiced his support. 

In a post on the internal prosecution network that day, Prosecutor Kang stated, "It is essential to seek the judgment of a higher court regarding parts where acquittal was granted, citing misinterpretation of law and errors of fact as grounds for appeal."

In an ePros post titled "Necessity of Appealing the First-Instance Verdict for the Five Individuals Involved in the Daejang-dong Development Corruption," he explained, "If the first-instance court's judgment that bribery charges are absorbed into breach of trust charges is correct, then at least the charge of violating the Act on Special Cases Concerning the Punishment of Certain Economic Crimes (breach of trust), with damages exceeding 42.8 billion won, should be recognized." He added, "If not, it is reasonable (appropriate) to consider that the large sums of money that Kim Man-bae and Yoo Dong-gyu agreed to exchange constitute separate bribery charges."

He further stated, "Above all, the biggest problem is the issue of recovering criminal proceeds amounting to astronomical sums." He expressed his measured but sharp reaction by saying, "By dropping the appeal, we are now unable to recover a single cent of criminal proceeds from Nam Wook and Jeong Young-hak, and even though only one-tenth of the initially expected amount was ordered for forfeiture against Kim Man-bae, we have no choice but to overlook it." 

Cheon Young-hwan, a prosecutor at the Ulsan District Prosecutors' Office, demanded, "What is the reason the Ministry of Justice and the Supreme Prosecutors' Office opposed the unanimous decision by the investigative and trial prosecutors to file an appeal?" Prosecutor Cheon added, "I demand the resignation of the Minister of Justice and the leadership of the Supreme Prosecutors' Office for their acts of betrayal against the people." He expressed strong distrust, asking, "Why are the Ministry of Justice and the Supreme Prosecutors' Office, whose purpose is to protect the people through law and due process, seeking to protect specific individuals from the law and trials?" 

Editorial Department