Kim Jae-seop, a lawmaker from the People Power Party, holds a press conference on the morning of the 13th regarding the past case where Jung Won-oh, the Seoul mayoral candidate for the Democratic Party of Korea, was convicted of assaulting police officers and civilians. [Photo=Yonhap News]  

Kim Jae-seop, a lawmaker from the People Power Party (Dobong-gu Gap), held a press conference at the National Assembly's Communication Hall in Yeouido, Seoul, on the morning of the 13th, concerning the past case where Jung Won-oh, the Seoul mayoral candidate for the Democratic Party of Korea, was convicted of assaulting police officers and civilians.

Rep. Kim stated, "Candidate Jung Won-oh has repeatedly lied to the public about his past assault convictions," and added, "If he continues to provide false explanations, we will file a complaint for disseminating false information under the Public Official Election Act, along with additional evidence."

He further asserted, "As an aide to the Yangcheon District Office head, Candidate Jung Won-oh, after drinking, assaulted two civilians and two police officers performing their duties." Rep. Kim argued that this was a severe 'drunken violence' incident, and a serious matter for which an ordinary suspect would have been arrested.

Moreover, "Two days ago, when the court ruling was disclosed, Candidate Jung Won-oh appeared on broadcast and made excuses, claiming it was an argument stemming from a difference in perspective on the May 18 Democratization Movement."

Rep. Kim refuted Candidate Jung Won-oh's explanation as a lie, stating, "According to the verbatim records of the Yangcheon District Council, Candidate Jung's assault had nothing to do with the May 18 Democratization Movement."

The truth of the incident, he explained, is that "Candidate Jung coerced the cafe owner to have the female employee spend the night out, threatened the owner when he refused, assaulted a citizen who tried to stop him, and even assaulted the responding police officers – a horrific incident."

The following is the full text of Kim Jae-seop's press conference statement.

Greetings. Esteemed citizens, beloved residents of Seoul. I am Kim Jae-seop, a member of the National Assembly representing Dobong-gu Gap.

I stand before you today to raise the issue of Candidate Jung Won-oh repeatedly lying to the public about his past assault convictions.

According to the court ruling disclosed two days ago, Candidate Jung Won-oh, as an aide to the Yangcheon District Office head, assaulted two civilians and two police officers performing their duties after drinking. This was a severe 'drunken violence' incident and a serious matter for which an ordinary suspect would have been arrested.

In response, Candidate Jung Won-oh has explained this as an argument stemming from a difference in perspective on the May 18 Democratization Movement. After the court ruling was revealed two days ago, he appeared on broadcast and stated that this was content he had disclosed in every election and that he had lived reflecting on it as a lesson to atone.

However, evidence has emerged that Candidate Jung Won-oh's explanation is a lie. According to the verbatim records of the Yangcheon District Council that I have obtained, Candidate Jung's assault had nothing to do with the May 18 Democratization Movement. It was a horrific incident where he coerced the cafe owner to have the female employee spend the night out, threatened the owner when he refused, assaulted a citizen who tried to stop him, and even assaulted the responding police officers.

I will explain in more detail.

Nine days after the assault incident involving Candidate Jung, on October 20, 1995, during a plenary session of the Yangcheon District Council, a councilor officially inquired about the details of Candidate Jung Won-oh's assault case to the then-Yangcheon District Office head. The verbatim records from that session provide very detailed and vivid accounts of the assault at the time, comparable to a formal deposition.

I will now read from the verbatim records of that day's plenary session, which are still posted on the Yangcheon District Office website.

“Around 11 PM on October 11th, at a cafe in Sinjeong 5-dong, Yangcheon-gu, the Chief Secretary and a secretary to the popularly elected District Office head, after consuming approximately 150,000 won worth of alcohol at the cafe, demanded that the cafe owner allow the female employee to spend the night out. When the owner refused, the Chief Secretary and the secretary threatened him, saying things like ‘Are you going to ruin our business?’ and got into an argument with the owner. During this time, a customer who was drinking at an adjacent table, identified as an aide to a councilor, tried to intervene. The District Office head's Chief Secretary Kim and Secretary Jung then assaulted this aide, saying, ‘Are you the boss just because you're an aide?’ inflicting an injury requiring two weeks of treatment. They then kicked Mr. Kim, a resident of Sinjeong 5-dong, who was standing in front of the cafe, in the chest and shoulder, and verbally abused him, leading to his hospitalization at Hongik Hospital for treatment. Two police officers who responded to the 112 call attempted to de-escalate the situation, but Chief Secretary Kim and Secretary Jung assaulted them. Officer Hong sustained an injury requiring two weeks of treatment to his chest and shoulder, and Officer Shim suffered a head injury requiring 10 days of treatment. Secretary Jung then engaged in self-harm at the scene, obstructing the police officers' official duties. As approximately 30 nearby residents gathered due to the commotion in the middle of the night, Chief Secretary Kim emphasized his position as the secretary to the popularly elected District Office head, causing disgust and discomfort to the residents. He then attempted to flee for about 50 meters but was apprehended by Mr. Kim, who had sustained injuries, and the police officers, and was taken to the police station and arrested.”

The above is the content officially revealed at the plenary session of the Yangcheon District Council held on October 20, 1995, shortly after Candidate Jung Won-oh's assault incident. According to this, Candidate Jung Won-oh's assault conviction has no connection whatsoever to differences in perspective regarding the May 18 Democratization Movement. After drinking, he demanded that the cafe owner allow the female employee to spend the night out. He threatened the owner when he refused. He assaulted a citizen who tried to stop him. He assaulted the responding police officers and even engaged in self-harm. It was, in every sense, a dirty 'drunken violence' incident.

If this is the case, has Candidate Jung Won-oh been repeatedly providing false explanations to the public about his past assault convictions?

Candidate Jung Won-oh stated that he uses his past assault conviction as a 'lesson to reflect on his immaturity at the time.' What exactly is he reflecting on, and what lesson is he drawing from it?

The mayor of Seoul, responsible for the capital city of Seoul, the heart of the Republic of Korea and the home of ten million citizens, requires a higher degree of moral integrity than any other public official. To guarantee the public's right to know and the correct political choices of Seoul citizens, the allegations against Candidate Jung Won-oh must be thoroughly scrutinized.

I ask Candidate Jung Won-oh.

It is an established fact, confirmed by the court, that Candidate Jung Won-oh assaulted citizens and police officers performing their duties. Furthermore, if, as stated in the verbatim records, Candidate Jung Won-oh's assault occurred while he was coercing a female employee to spend the night out during a drinking session, does Candidate Jung Won-oh himself believe he is qualified to be a candidate for Seoul mayor?

Candidate Jung Won-oh, if you are listening, please provide a sincere explanation to the public about your assault conviction now. You cannot deceive the public forever.

Furthermore, if you continue to provide false explanations, we will file a complaint for disseminating false information under the Public Official Election Act, along with additional evidence.

That is all.