Lee Rae-jin, a bereaved family member of the deceased public servant in the shooting incident that occurred in the West Sea in September 2020, speaks as she leaves the courtroom after the first-instance sentencing for former Blue House National Security Advisor Suh Hoon, former NIS Director Park Jie-won, and former Minister of National Defense Suh Wook at the Seoul Central District Court in Seoul on December 26, last year. Yonhap News

The prosecution is reportedly in final deliberations over whether to appeal the acquittal of all defendants in the 'West Sea Public Servant Shooting Cover-up Allegation' case.

The bereaved family of the late Lee Dae-joon, who died in the incident, plans to send a letter to U.S. President Donald Trump criticizing the South Korean government's response and urging international attention.

According to the bereaved family's side on the 1st, Lee Rae-jin, the elder brother of the deceased, plans to meet with officials from the U.S. Embassy in Korea on the 2nd to deliver the letter to President Trump.

Lee stated that as the 2nd is the last day for filing an appeal, he plans to hold a press conference at the National Assembly urging the prosecution to appeal, and then deliver the letter to the U.S. Embassy.

The letter drafted by the bereaved family (preliminary draft) includes the need for international attention to the current government's attempts to distort the truth by abandoning appeals, given that the main defendants in the case were acquitted in the first instance.

The bereaved family stated, "The murder of a Ministry of Oceans and Fisheries official that occurred in the West Sea on September 22, 2020, has been subjected to attempts to twist the same facts as an alleged North Korean defection, then not, and then again as a defection, depending on the regime's political orientation." They continued, "At the time, the government branded the victim as a self-proclaimed North Korean defector to avoid responsibility, and suspicions of fabrication and distortion have continuously been raised in the investigation and announcement process by the Coast Guard and the Ministry of National Defense."

They added, "Recently, with the main defendants being acquitted in the first instance, no one is taking responsibility." They elaborated, "Representative Jung is questioning the indictment itself and advocating for a special prosecutor. Prime Minister Kim stated that the indictment constitutes a fabricated prosecution and that it is only natural for the prosecution to drop the appeal. President Lee also expressed the stance that the prosecutors who filed the charges should be held accountable."

They further emphasized, "All these statements are aimed not at clarifying responsibility for the victim's death and the state's failure to rescue, but at protecting the defendants and nullifying the prosecution. Just as President Trump has shown deep concern for human rights violations in South Africa, deep international attention is needed for the attempts to infringe upon human rights and distort the truth being inflicted upon the bereaved family under the current Lee Jae-myung administration."

Suh Hoon, Park Jie-won, and Suh Wook attend the sentencing. Yonhap News

Previously, on the 26th of last month, the first instance court acquitted former Blue House National Security Advisor Suh Hoon, former NIS Director Park Jie-won, former Minister of National Defense Suh Wook, former Coast Guard Commissioner General Kim Hong-hee, and former NIS Deputy Secretary-General Noh Eun-chae of charges including abuse of power.

The court ruled that there was insufficient evidence to find them guilty of covering up the shooting and incineration or attempting to frame the victim as a defector, and that there was insufficient evidence of illegality in the procedures and content of the missing person report, dissemination, analysis, situation assessment, and investigation process and results announcement.

With the appeal deadline (midnight on the 3rd) approaching, the prosecution's deliberations are deepening. It is extremely rare for the prosecution to drop an appeal in a case where all defendants have been acquitted.

There are also views suggesting a divergence of opinion between the leadership of the Seoul Central District Prosecutors' Office, which handled the investigation and prosecution, and the investigation team regarding the necessity of an appeal.

In fact, the investigation team submitted a report to Chief Prosecutor Park Cheol-woo of the Central District Prosecutors' Office with an opinion to appeal, but Park reportedly sent the report back with instructions stating that "analysis and supplementation of the acquittal reasons in the judgment are necessary."

The prosecution, which has undergone significant turmoil including internal backlash and the resignation of the acting Prosecutor General following the 'Daesang-dong case appeal waiver' incident, appears to be facing another test.

Some speculate that Justice Minister Chung Sung-ho may directly decide on the appeal through the investigative command, given that the President and the Prime Minister have publicly expressed negative opinions on the appeal.

Previously, President Lee publicly reprimanded the prosecution at a Cabinet meeting on the 30th of last month, stating, "Does it make sense to create a case that never existed and hide evidence to send someone to prison? Someone must be held accountable for this."

Prime Minister Kim also said, "This is a point where the NIS and the prosecution's wrongdoing, which can be seen as an abuse of inspection authority, an unreasonable application of law, and a de facto fabricated prosecution, has occurred and been recognized. Isn't it natural for the prosecution that investigated the case to drop the appeal?" He also mentioned the need to inspect whether the prosecutors in charge at the time had properly investigated and indicted.

In response, Minister Chung stated, "I believe there needs to be a thorough fact-finding investigation into the past abuses of power by the prosecution in any form." This was interpreted as implying that filing an appeal would not be appropriate, given that the court's acquittal was a result of the prosecution's flawed indictment.