The prosecution publicly protested against the court’s decision to dismiss the arrest warrant for Lee Jae-myeong, leader of the Democratic Party of Korea. The prosecution poured out unusually high-level criticism toward the court over the results of the warrant review, including ‘regrets and contradictions’.
On the 27th, the Seoul Central District Prosecutors’ Office issued a statement immediately after Representative Lee’s arrest warrant was dismissed and objected, saying, “The court’s judgment was contradictory.”
The prosecution emphasized that some of the charges presented by the prosecution against CEO Lee were justified, saying, “(The court) acknowledged the explanation for the charge of instigation of perjury and said there was significant suspicion that CEO Lee was involved in the Baekhyeon-dong development corruption.” did.
The prosecution pointed out that it was incomprehensible that the court ultimately decided to dismiss the case despite acknowledging the possibility of destruction of evidence at the same time as explaining the charges.
The prosecution said, “It is difficult to understand and very regrettable that they judged that ‘there is room for dispute’ based on the statement of former Vice Governor Lee Hwa-young of Gyeonggi Province, who acknowledged Lee’s involvement in remittances to North Korea.”
In addition, in response to the court’s judgment that ‘it is difficult to determine CEO Lee’s concern about destruction of evidence,’ the prosecution pointed out that it was a contradictory ruling, saying, “The fact that the charge of instigation of perjury was vindicated means that the destruction of evidence was realistic.”
In particular, he criticized, “It is contradictory to acknowledge circumstances that may lead to suspicion of inappropriate intervention by people around him, but to say that there is no concern about destruction of evidence.”
On this day, Chief Judge Yoo Chang-hoon of the Seoul Central District Court in charge of warrants dismissed Representative Lee’s arrest warrant, saying, “It is difficult to conclude that there is a risk of destruction of evidence.” Chief Judge Yoo did not acknowledge the need to arrest Representative Lee, but explained the basis for his judgment in an unusual 892 characters.
Regarding concerns about the destruction토토사이트 of evidence, which was an issue in deciding whether to arrest the first leader of the main opposition party in the Constitutional Court, Chief Judge Yoo said, “In the case of the perjury teacher and the Baekhyeon-dong development project, it is difficult to say that there is a concern about the destruction of evidence in light of the human and material data secured to date.” I judged. The court decided that an arrest investigation was not necessary as sufficient data, including the extensive data and statements presented by the prosecution during the warrant review, had already been secured.
Additionally, with regard to the suspicion of remittances to North Korea, the prosecution claimed that there were circumstances of appeasement and pressure on Lee Hwa-young, former vice-governor of Gyeonggi Province, but it was deemed that there was insufficient data to determine Lee’s direct intervention.
As the arrest warrant for CEO Lee is ultimately dismissed, the prosecution’s investigation is expected to suffer a significant blow. For over two years, more than 300 search and seizures and multiple summonses were conducted targeting Representative Lee under the tag of ‘opposition suppression’ and ‘targeted investigation’, but the court ruled that the main charges of breach of trust and bribery were not fully proven. It appears that we will face the greatest crisis.
Although the court determined that there was room to suspect Lee’s involvement in the Baekhyeon-dong development preferential allegation, the legal and political circles believe that it will not be easy for the prosecution to request an arrest warrant again.
Representative Lee, who barely escaped the risk of arrest, left the Seoul Detention Center in Uiwang-si, Gyeonggi-do at around 3:50 am on the 27th and said, “I would like to express my deep gratitude to the judiciary for clearly proving that it is the last bastion of human rights.”