Kim Ji-yong, the nominee for the inaugural Director of the Serious Crimes Investigation Agency, addressed allegations that he effectively abandoned prosecution against a fraud defendant during his tenure as a prosecutor. He stated that he anticipated a clear acquittal due to the lack of credibility in the complainant's testimony. He also denied claims of favoritism related to a former Prosecutor General and violations of investigation procedures.
In a statement distributed to reporters on October 12, Kim explained that while serving as the head of the second trial division at the Seoul Central District Prosecutors' Office in 2016, he did not specify a sentence for businessman A, who was charged with fraud, because of inconsistencies between the complainant Kim's testimony and objective account transaction records.
He continued, "I requested additional clarification from Kim, but he refused, leading to the expectation of a clear acquittal." He added that he requested the court to rule according to the law and principles, and indeed, the first trial resulted in an acquittal.
Kim also clarified the circumstances under which he charged the complainant, Kim, with false accusation and perjury. He stated, "Upon analyzing a photo of cash submitted by Kim, which was claimed to be taken in 2010, it was confirmed that some of the banknotes were issued in 2014."
He noted that some perjury was acknowledged during the trial, leading to a guilty verdict, and expressed disagreement with criticisms of abuse of prosecution rights.
In response to claims that the investigation into Kim's false accusation began before securing account inquiry results, Kim explained, "From September 2016, I requested Kim to submit documentation regarding the source of funds and to appear, but he did not comply. We summoned A to ascertain the facts of the case and conducted witness interviews due to suspicions of perjury."
He also denied allegations of using inappropriate locations during the investigation and falsely recording the participation of investigators who did not attend the suspect interrogation report.
Kim stated, "Trial prosecutors conducted investigations in a designated trial division space, not in a storage area." He added that while investigators may have been absent at times due to concurrent trial support duties, he believed they participated in the investigation.
Regarding allegations that his relationship with the former Prosecutor General influenced the handling of the case, Kim emphasized, "There were no indications of the former Prosecutor General's involvement in the original case. We handled the case based on the perjury evidence revealed during the trial, following standard procedures without any other considerations."
Earlier, CBS No Cut News reported that Kim was accused of abusing prosecution rights while handling a fraud case stemming from the National Seal fraud case during his time as the head of the second trial division at the Seoul Central District Prosecutors' Office.
The case dates back to 2010, when Kim, the wife of Min Hong-kyu, the former head of the National Seal Production Division, claimed that businessman A had given her 50 million won in exchange for a promise to pay a lawyer who was a former Prosecutor General. After not receiving the money back, Kim filed a fraud complaint against A.
The prosecution charged A with fraud, but Kim's trial division, under Kim's leadership, questioned the credibility of Kim's testimony and did not specify a sentence. A was acquitted in the first trial, and the prosecution did not appeal, confirming the acquittal.
During A's trial, the prosecution suspected that Kim had falsely accused A and testified falsely in court, leading to a separate investigation. In May 2017, Kim was charged with false accusation and perjury.
In February 2018, the court acquitted Kim of the false accusation charge, and the same ruling was upheld in the appeals court, indicating that it was difficult to view the fact that Kim had given A 50 million won as false. Only some perjury charges were acknowledged as guilty.
Controversy also arose regarding the investigation procedures. According to CBS, the court did not recognize the evidentiary value of the suspect interrogation report prepared during Kim's investigation, citing that investigators did not participate legally. Although Kim later moved to the position of head of the first inspection division at the Supreme Prosecutors' Office, there were criticisms that no related inspections were conducted.
Additionally, there are allegations that Kim failed to properly handle another whistleblower case during his tenure as head of the first inspection division. According to Ajou Economy, former prosecutor Choi reported misconduct related to the Asan Cham Hospital investigation and allegations of retaliatory personnel actions in 2017, but the Supreme Prosecutors' Office closed the case the following year, citing the expiration of the disciplinary period and lack of evidence. Choi claimed that he was not even able to attend an investigation, holding Kim responsible. Kim's side stated, "We will provide further comments after reviewing the content."
* This article has been translated by AI.
Copyright ⓒ Aju Press All rights reserved.