The special prosecutor announced that there are indications of the Yoon Suk Yeol administration’s interference in the North Korea remittance investigation, but specific intervention is necessary for an investigation to be possible.
Doesn’t the Office of the Senior Secretary for Civil Affairs currently receive reports on investigations? By that logic, the comprehensive special prosecutor would now have authority over all cases that occurred during the Yoon administration.
Park Sang-yong, a deputy chief prosecutor at the Incheon District Prosecutors’ Office, who is accused of attempting to persuade former Gyeonggi Province Vice Governor for Peace Lee Hwa-young during the investigation into the Ssangbangwool North Korea remittance allegations, made this claim regarding the second comprehensive special prosecutor team’s (led by Special Prosecutor Kwon Chang-young) investigation into the Yoon administration’s alleged attempt to interfere with the investigation.
He stated that there were no instructions or interventions from presidential aides with prosecutorial backgrounds when investigating the North Korea remittance allegations at the Suwon District Prosecutors’ Office. He pointed out that if the special prosecutor team views routine reporting as abuse of investigative authority, the scope of the special prosecutor’s investigation could expand indefinitely.
Regarding the so-called National Intelligence Service (NIS) seizure and selective submission allegations, which the ruling party has focused on during the recent parliamentary investigation, he dismissed them, saying it was a procedure-based measure and that there were no instances where only evidence favorable to the prosecution was submitted to the court.
Calls Yoon Government Involvement Claims Absurd… Also Dismisses Alleged Pressure by Ex-Prosecutor Aide
In an interview with News1 on Monday afternoon, Prosecutor Park expressed his bewilderment at the comprehensive special prosecutor team’s announcement that they had confirmed attempts by the Yoon administration’s presidential office to interfere with the Ssangbangwool North Korea remittance case.
The comprehensive special prosecutor team recently took over the case from the prosecution, which had been investigating and examining the North Korea remittance case. The basis for this transfer was Article 2, Paragraph 1, Clause 13 of the Special Prosecutor Act.
Clause 13 refers to cases where former President Yoon and the First Lady allegedly received reports on investigations and abused investigative authority through concealment, cover-ups, or persuasion in investigative procedures, not only for their own cases but also for cases involving others. The comprehensive special prosecutor initiated an investigation, believing that former President Yoon or the First Lady influenced the direction of the North Korea remittance case investigation.
Regarding this, Prosecutor Park stated that while major developments in the case, such as the search and seizure of the NIS, a key intelligence agency, during the North Korea remittance investigation, may have been reported, this would have been at a routine level.
Prosecutor Park said that if the Office of the Senior Secretary for Civil Affairs doesn’t receive reports on the contents of a search and seizure of the NIS, what exactly is it doing? It’s absurd to claim that even carrying out routine duties is automatically considered a crime.
He emphasized that the special prosecutor currently has no investigative authority but received the case from the prosecution. This could be considered an abuse of power as it forced them to perform duties they’re not obligated to. Any investigation conducted under these circumstances can only be seen as a clear targeted investigation.
He firmly stated that there were absolutely no investigation orders or pressure through former prosecutor aides who held key positions in the Yoon administration’s presidential office at the time.
Prosecutor Park dismissed the allegations, saying that if there had been any pressure, it could have been communicated to the Minister of Justice. When the Minister of Justice gives instructions to the Prosecutor General regarding investigations, it must be done through specific written documents, but there were no such procedures.
Ruling Party: Selective Raid by NIS… Prosecutor Park: Stock Boosting, Reinforcing Lee’s North Korea Visit Aim
He also refuted the so-called NIS seizure and selective submission allegations that surfaced during the recent parliamentary investigation, claiming they were not true.
On April 3, NIS Director Lee Jong-seok appeared at the parliamentary investigation and raised suspicions that a chief prosecutor dispatched as the head of the NIS’s inspection department pre-selected documents to be submitted to the Suwon District Prosecutors’ Office, submitting only 13 out of 66 items and concealing the rest.
Regarding this, Prosecutor Park explained that they claim he colluded with the dispatched prosecutor, but that person (the head of the inspection department) would have difficulty knowing about the North Korea remittance case. They are not in a position to pre-assess the facts of the case and determine what’s advantageous or disadvantageous.
Prosecutor Park also stated that it’s difficult to view the evidence obtained by the prosecution through the NIS search and seizure and submitted to the court as one-sidedly unfavorable to former Vice Governor Lee’s side.
The ruling party has pointed out the prosecution’s bias, citing that among the NIS documents excluded from seizure, there was a report suggesting that the North Korea remittance was for the sole purpose of boosting Ssangbangwool’s stock price, rather than for then-Gyeonggi Governor Lee Jae Myung’s visit to North Korea.
In response, Prosecutor Park argued that for Ssangbangwool to gain authority and market trust, leading to a surge in stock prices, the governor would need to visit North Korea and announce projects with North Korean decision-makers. The more talk there is about stock price manipulation, the clearer the governor’s purpose for visiting North Korea becomes.
Recording Saying Blocking the Probe Called a Misstatement… Draws Line on Plea Deal Allegations
Regarding the recording with lawyer Seo Min-seok that sparked controversy over alleged persuasion during the North Korea remittance investigation, he said that while some expressions might have been inappropriate, there was absolutely no plea bargaining.
Lawyer Seo was the defense attorney for former Vice Governor Lee Hwa-young during the North Korea remittance case.
On June 19, 2023, when it was revealed that Prosecutor Park had said things like that they’re preventing all these additional investigations from happening during a phone call with Lawyer Seo, suspicions of improper investigation intensified.
Regarding this, Prosecutor Park claimed that at the time, the investigation kept spreading (to various suspicions), and he merely told prosecutors on other investigation teams that this is the main case, and they say they’re going to confess today, essentially putting them on standby.
On Monday, Prosecutor Park was notified of his suspension from duty by the Ministry of Justice. Minister of Justice Cho Sung-ho announced through a notice that he had ordered the suspension of Deputy Chief Prosecutor Park, who is under inspection for misconduct such as violations of official duties during the investigation process and behavior that raises doubts about the fairness of the investigation.
In this situation, Prosecutor Park is actively expressing his opinions through his social media, which some criticize as a violation of political neutrality.
Regarding this, Prosecutor Park pleaded that he’s always adhered to the principle that investigations speak through indictments and trials speak through verdicts, but now that principle is no longer being observed. He’s appealed to the Supreme Prosecutors’ Office and the Ministry of Justice, sent emails and notes, but there’s been no response, confessing his frustration.
