Park Jong-jun, the former head of the Presidential Security Service, was acquitted in a first trial on charges of deleting information from secret phones used by key figures during the martial law period, including former President Yoon Suk Yeol.
On May 21, the Seoul Central District Court's Criminal Division 32, presided over by Judge Ryu Kyung-jin, ruled in favor of Park, stating that the evidence for the charges of evidence destruction was insufficient.
The court explained that the prosecution's claims were not substantiated, noting that the screen of Hong Jang-won, the former first deputy director of the National Intelligence Service, was publicly revealed, exposing the secret phone ID of the president. In this context, the court stated that the head of the security service's support headquarters and others acted based on their best judgment to consider and report the deletion of accounts.
Furthermore, the court indicated that just because the actions taken afterward might have been inadequate or that better methods could have been employed does not imply an intention to destroy evidence. It emphasized that Park's decision was made after consulting with the National Intelligence Service director and considering the advice of staff, leading to a lack of evidence supporting the claim of evidence destruction.
The court also pointed out that Park did not take similar actions regarding other individuals, such as former Police Chief Jo Ji-ho, which further weakened the argument for intentional evidence destruction.
Previously, the special prosecution team had uncovered that Park deleted information from the secret phones of Yoon, Hong, and former Seoul Police Chief Kim Bong-sik during their investigation last year. The secret phones, managed by the security service, can be operated remotely, and the service deleted the information from these phones using a remote logout method.
The special prosecution team charged Park with intentionally deleting evidence related to the martial law. During the sentencing hearing, they sought a three-year prison term for him. The team plans to review the ruling in detail before deciding whether to appeal.
* This article has been translated by AI.
Copyright ⓒ Aju Press All rights reserved.