The sculpture 'Standing Eye' installed at the Supreme Prosecutors' Office in Seocho-gu, Seoul, on the 11th, amid spreading theories of responsibility for the acting Prosecutor General, Noh Man-seok, following the 'Daeguong Appeal Withdrawal' incident. Acting Prosecutor General Noh took a day off today and is contemplating. Yonhap News. 

As the repercussions of the prosecution's withdrawal of its appeal in the Daeguong case continue, it has been revealed that prosecutors from the Seoul Central District Prosecutors' Office investigation and trial teams were notified of the Supreme Prosecutors' Office's decision not to appeal approximately three hours before the appeal deadline expired.

According to legal circles on the 11th, Justice Minister Jung Sung-ho first received a report on the Supreme Prosecutors' Office's intention to appeal the Daeguong development corruption allegations case around 11 PM on the 6th, after the conclusion of the National Assembly's Special Committee on Budget and Accounts comprehensive policy questioning.

Minister Jung is said to have expressed an opinion at that time to the effect of "thoroughly review." Since then, the leadership of the Supreme Prosecutors' Office appears to have been internally deliberating on whether to withdraw the appeal.

However, the investigation and trial teams of the Seoul Central District Prosecutors' Office, unaware of this situation, received approval for the appeal from the Deputy Prosecutor General of the Central District Prosecutors' Office and the Prosecutor General of the Central District Prosecutors' Office between 2 PM and 6 PM on the 7th.

The prosecutors from the 5th Trial Division of the Central District Prosecutors' Office, responsible for maintaining the prosecution, received the Supreme Prosecutors' Office's decision not to appeal around 8:45 PM on the 7th, approximately three hours before the appeal deadline.

Although the Prosecutor General of the Central District Prosecutors' Office had approved the appeal, they were informed that the Supreme Prosecutors' Office had communicated its disapproval.

Prosecutor Generals 'Demand Explanation on Circumstances of Acting Prosecutor General's Appeal Withdrawal'. Yonhap News. 

The trial team repeatedly requested confirmation of the processing direction from the researcher in charge of the Anti-Corruption Department at the Supreme Prosecutors' Office, but only received a message around 10:11 PM stating, "I heard that the head of the Anti-Corruption Division 1 was reported to and that the head of the Anti-Corruption Division 1 was supposed to contact the head of the 5th Trial Division. I'm frustrated because I haven't received any information from above."

Amidst this, the Supreme Prosecutors' Office reportedly provided its final response to the Ministry of Justice regarding the decision to withdraw the appeal around 11 PM.

The deputy prosecutor general of the Central District Prosecutors' Office informed the investigation and trial teams that both the Supreme Prosecutors' Office and the Prosecutor General of the Central District Prosecutors' Office had disallowed the appeal and there was nothing that could be done, approximately 40 minutes before the appeal deadline, around 11:20 PM.

Although the deputy prosecutor general engaged in efforts to persuade the Prosecutor General of the Central District Prosecutors' Office after the investigation and trial teams strongly objected, their efforts were not accepted, and ultimately, at around 11:53 PM, they were informed that the appeal would not be approved.

While it was theoretically possible for the Prosecutor General of the Central District Prosecutors' Office, the deputy prosecutor general, or the investigation and trial prosecutors to file an appeal through delegated authority, it would have entailed significant burden as it would be considered 'insubordination.' Consequently, the prosecution's appeal was not filed by the appeal deadline of midnight on the 7th.

Within the prosecution, voices calling for the resignation of Acting Prosecutor General Noh Man-seok (Deputy Prosecutor General of the Supreme Prosecutors' Office), who ultimately disallowed the appeal, are growing louder.

The argument is that the decision was made by excessively considering the influence of the government and the ruling party, which are pushing for the abolition of the prosecution, and by arbitrarily intervening in the case handling without respecting the opinions of the investigation and trial teams.

Following the researchers at the Supreme Prosecutors' Office recommending Noh's resignation the previous day, posts criticizing Noh by junior prosecutors have been continuously appearing on the internal prosecution network.

Regarding the circumstances of the appeal withdrawal, Acting Prosecutor General Noh stated only that he "comprehensively decided in reference to the Ministry of Justice's opinion, as in usual cases." However, within the prosecution, opinions that the specific reporting and decision-making process needs to be clarified are gaining strength.

If Minister Jung actively intervened in the case handling by strongly pushing for the withdrawal of the appeal, it could be a violation of the Prosecutors' Office Act. If Noh made a hasty decision to withdraw the appeal without any pressure from the Ministry of Justice, he would find it difficult to avoid internal criticism for an imprudent political judgment.

Yonhap News