The Supreme Court of Korea overturned the lower court’s decision to acquit former Democratic Party of Korea leader Rep. Lee Jae-myung on two charges of election law violations, sending the case back to the Seoul High Court.
The top court’s 10-2 ruling Thursday reversed the Seoul High Court's verdict from late March, which found the evidence presented against Lee regarding false statements "did not prove the charges beyond a reasonable doubt."
Chief Justice Jo Hee-de said in the televised proceeding that the lower court’s ruling was flawed due to a “misinterpretation of the legal principles” concerning the offense of publicly announcing false information under Article 250 of the Public Official Election Act.
“The presidential candidate’s meaning and scope of freedom of political expression cannot be equivalent to those of ordinary citizens. The interpretation of the Public Official Election Act’s Article 250 must be understood within this context,” Jo said.
The top court partially acquitted Lee of violating the Public Official Election Act.
But it stated that Lee made false claims when he denied his relationship with the late Kim Moon-ki, former head of Development Division 1 at Seongnam Development Corp., during a televised interview as the Democratic Party of Korea’s presidential candidate in December 2021.
Kim was accused of involvement in a land corruption scandal in Seongnam, Gyeonggi Province, when Lee was the city's mayor.
The majority of the Supreme Court justices found that Lee’s claim was an important fact that could have influenced voters and could not be seen merely as a supplementary argument in the way the lower court insisted.
The court also found that Lee had made a false statement at a broadcast parliamentary hearing in October 2021 by saying he was coerced into rezoning a property for a development project while Seongnam mayor — a decision some speculate he made for personal gain.
According to the Supreme Court, the Land Ministry did not exert any pressure on the city of Seongnam nor threaten Lee, leading the Supreme Court to judge that his broadcasted statements were false.
"The judgment of the lower court contains an error that affected the ruling due to a misunderstanding of the legal principles regarding the offense of publishing false information as stipulated in Article 250 of the Public Official Election Act,” Jo said.
In response to the top court’s ruling, Lee declined to immediately accept the ruling.
“The verdict was made in a completely different direction than I had expected," Lee said during a conference session with the workers held at a local restaurant in Jongno-gu, central Seoul, Thursday. "What is important is that the law is a reflection of the people’s consensus. The people’s thoughts are what matter the most.”
The top court’s decision does not mean that Lee will immediately lose both his parliamentary seat and eligibility to run for public office for a decade. Lee could still run for president, as the final decision in the retrial is widely expected to take a few months, meaning it is unlikely to be delivered before the June 3 presidential election.
Lee’s case will be sent back to the Seoul High Court for a ruling, which could find him guilty since the top court did not clear Lee of the election law violation charges.
Article 19 of the Public Official Election Act stipulates anyone convicted of violating election laws who receives a fine amounting to at least 1 million won ($700) or a heavier punishment is barred from running for office for 10 years.
Lee’s case was initially assigned to a panel of four justices — a conventional way for the Supreme Court to manage cases it hears on appeal — on April 22. But Chief Justice Jo decided to hear the case in a full court session after considering the high level of public interest and national concern.
A full-court review is one of two procedures by which the court exercises its power, convening with at least two-thirds of the justices and the chief justice presiding.
The court conducted two hearings over four days after the case was assigned to the justices. The final verdict was delivered nine days after the election law violation case was referred to the full bench.
sj_lee@heraldcorp.com
