Yoon Jae-soon, former chief secretary to the president, and Lim Jong-deuk, a member of the National Assembly from the People Power Party, were acquitted in a first trial regarding allegations of interference in appointments at the National Security Office during the Yoon Suk-yeol administration.
The Seoul Central District Court's Criminal Division 23, presided over by Judge Oh Se-yong, dismissed the charges against Yoon and Lim on September 21, which included abuse of power, violation of the State Public Officials Act, and breach of the Anti-Corruption and Whistleblower Protection Act.
In July, the special prosecutor's team had sought a five-year prison sentence for Yoon and a three-year sentence for Lim during the closing arguments.
A dismissal of charges indicates procedural flaws, concluding the trial without a determination of guilt or innocence regarding the substantive allegations.
The court stated, "The facts of this case do not fall within the scope of investigation defined by the special prosecutor's law, thus constituting an unauthorized prosecution," adding that the prosecution process violated legal regulations and was therefore invalid.
Yoon is accused of colluding with Lim, then the second deputy director of the National Security Office, and Im Gi-hoon, the then defense secretary, to appoint a specific officer to a drone strategy position at the National Crisis Management Center in September 2023. This officer was allegedly recommended by a contact who claimed that the individual, being a graduate of the Korea Military Academy, was being overlooked for promotion and requested placement in the National Security Office.
According to the special prosecutor's investigation, appointments to the National Security Office typically involve recommendations from the Ministry of National Defense based on suitable candidates from the Army, Navy, and Air Force. However, the appointed officer was not among those recommended, and the appointment was made in an unusual manner, increasing the number of selected personnel.
The special prosecutor's team became aware of these allegations during the investigation into the North Korean drone infiltration and indicted the individuals in December of last year.
However, the court found no relevance between this case and the drone incident as claimed by the special prosecutor. The court noted, "The personnel interference occurred around August to September 2023, while the drone incident took place around October 2024, indicating a temporal gap of approximately 13 months," and emphasized that the locations and actors involved were entirely different, with no apparent connections or interactions between the accused parties.
The court further stated, "The special prosecutor's investigation must be recognized only within the bounds of reasonable relevance. Expanding the scope of investigation based solely on media allegations or perceived necessity could infringe upon constitutional principles of due process and the rule of law in criminal matters."
Additionally, the court rejected the special prosecutor's argument that evidence obtained through a warrant issued for the investigation into the Pyongyang drone incident could also be used in this case, stating that the evidence was not common to both cases.
The court also pointed out that despite confirming in November 2025 that National Security Office officials were unrelated to the drone incident, the special prosecutor did not transfer the case to investigative agencies but proceeded with direct prosecution, indicating that this was an improper investigation not aligned with the special prosecutor's temporary and exceptional status, necessitating strict judicial oversight.
* This article has been translated by AI.
Copyright ⓒ Aju Press All rights reserved.