We are not living in a perfect world. Rather, we live in the real world we have described so far. It is a world where lawyers, litigants, and the media each ruthlessly pursue their own interests. -Kendle Kopi, <The Controversy of Public Opinion, Law, and Justice>
<The Conflict of Public Opinion, Law, and Justice>, written by renowned lawyer Kendle Kopi, a former prosecutor in the United States, is accompanied by a'court of law' where legal disputes unfold in the real world. It speaks of the coexistence of a'public opinion court' where public opinion trials are held. From the Socrates trial to the Michael Jackson trial, the author shows the interaction between these two courts, which sometimes seem ruthless and disorderly, through a variety of historical trial examples.
These two courts are appearing in Korea across the sea, as clearly as in the American ‘Judge of the Century’ in the book. Supporters and opponents of live streaming broadcasts on mobile phones, and litigants who express their opinions through Facebook even when there is no trial. Apart from the trial in the'court of law', Cho's trial in the'court of public opinion' outside the court is unfolding in various aspects.
● The court line of public opinion “I received my resignation” and the actual court line “No authority to request resignation”
The position of former Minister Cho Kook is condensed at the end of the court of public opinion before actually entering the court. Former Minister Cho's remarks to the media when calling for'balanced reporting' and towards the prosecution when referring to'the truthfulness of the investigation' have become sharper ahead of the last five trials. The analogy of the ‘Shock Bat’ and a comparison with the prosecution also appeared.
I've said it several times, but there is no right to compulsory investigation and supervision in the Civiljeong Chief's Office. If it is a criminal offense that the person subject to prosecution has refused to comply with the prosecution and cannot proceed with the legal prosecution anymore, the prosecutor has the right to compulsory investigation and the prosecutor who has the right to supervise.
In the case of personal corruption by the prosecutor, what are the cases where he was resigned without even proceeding with the prosecution, how should we understand that he wields an iron stick against other state agencies and did not even have a cotton bat for internal corruption? That is all. -Former Minister Cho Kook
attended the Central District Court, where the 5th trial was held on August 14th, and
until now, Minister Cho held the position that it was decided to receive Yoo Jae-soo's resignation due to the difficulty of further inspection, and that it did not cover the suspicion of Yoo Jae-soo. On the last day of December 2018, the response to the National Assembly Steering Committee and in the process of hearing candidates for the minister have clarified that they made a ``political decision'' by receiving Yoo Jae-soo's resignation. Former secretary Baek Won-woo also clarified the same purpose in the response to the political committee in December 2018.
If the explanation is true, on the day when those who should have been delivered as witnesses, "receive the resignation", the former Minister Cho once again turned to the'court of public opinion' and'did everything at the time. 'Emphasized the point.
He also compared his case with the prosecution's case. The case of'the prosecutor who was resigned without personal corruption inspection' mentioned by former Minister Cho seems to be the work of the Southern District Prosecutor's Office, who resigned in 2015 after a sexual offense alleged. (Prosecutor Im Eun-jeong, who has been criticizing the prosecution organization, mentioned the case of Prosecutor Jin Mo in a Facebook article on the 9th, five days before Cho's 5th hearing. After resigning, Secretary Choo Mi-ae and Seoul Central District Prosecutors’ Office Seong-yoon Lee, The point of the article was that Prosecutor Moon Chan-seok, who poured out criticism, claimed that he made a false report related to the incident during the days of the Southern District Prosecutor's Office. Prosecutor Im Eun-jung's writing was aimed at Prosecutor Moon Chan-seok, but was shared among supporters after Cho's remarks. Minister Cho asked if the prosecutors who had been resigned without conducting prosecutors for sexual prosecutors were at least capable of prosecuting themselves after prosecuting and resigning.
But in the'court of law', the aspect was a little different. This is because a testimony different from that of Cho's claim came from the mouths of the witnesses. At the time, Vice Chairman of the Financial Services Commission, Kim Yong-beom, the first vice-minister of the Ministry of Science and Technology, who received the results of the inspection of the Chief Civil Service Office of the Blue House, testified again that he had not been told to ``receive your resignation'' from the Blue House.
| ▶Prosecutor: Did you state that you got a call to Baek Won-woo in December 2017? ▷ Kim Yong-beom, 1st Vice Minister of the Ministry of Finance (At the time, Vice-Chairman of the Financial Services Commission): On December 5, 2017, such a (related to suspicion of abuse of Yoo Jae-soo) came out, and the Financial Services Commission also clarified it, and the head of the Financial Policy Bureau is specifically reported in the media and clarified. Because it became specific, it was finally officialized in the world. Before that, it was about rumors. Of course, this was something that the Financial Services Commission would have taken care of, and the Blue House would have known it... There's a sidewalk and not too far away, as of early December, the obvious thing is that there was a sidewalk and that's a pretty big deal for us, so I remember it ever since. After that, secretary Won-woo Baek called and said, ``There was a fight, I was inspected at the Blue House, most of it was cleared, but some were not resolved. Note, it will be difficult to remain in the position of the head of the financial policy department.'' (Omitted) ▶Prosecutor: At first, the defendant's claimant Baek Won-woo said,'As a high-ranking public official, there is a problem of maintaining dignity and personnel measures are necessary.' After that, Vice Chairman Kim Yong-beom came in at the Blue House meeting and met me and said,'The Blue House position How about when you ask,'What is this?' and insist,'The Blue House said that it would be good to arrange it by repairing the resignation'? ▷ Kim Yong-beom, 1st Vice Minister of the Ministry of Finance (At the time, Vice Chairman of the Financial Services Commission): I did not hear the details. |
Choi Jong-gu, chairman of the Financial Services Commission, also testified that he did not understand the report of the results of the inspection of the Blue House at the time, meaning'receive your resignation'.
| ▶Prosecutor: Haven't you heard from the Blue House that it would be nice to have Yoo Jae-soo's position in the Blue House? ▷ Jong-gu Choi, then Chairman of the Financial Services Commission: Yes, I heard everything from Kim Yong-beom. The vice-chairman never said that he heard anything like that from me. |
They also testified that receiving Yoo Jae-soo's resignation was not for disciplinary purposes, but that Yoo Jae-soo himself received procedurally in hopes of recommending the Democratic Party's chief expert after his resignation.
Former Minister Cho and former secretary Won-woo Baek's defense at the time did not persistently attack the credibility of the witness's statements, even though they might not have conveyed their intentions at the time. Former Minister Cho did not stress that'I told the former secretary Won-woo Baek, who delivered the results of the inspection, to be resigned.' It is a little different from what clearly explained to public opinion that "we took measures to receive resignation" from the statement of the National Assembly Operation Committee in 2018 to before the court on August 14th.
| ▶ Former Minister Cho Kook Attorney: There are some of the last things the Witness said earlier, but Baek Won-woo’s ‘I think it’s hard to work as director Yoo Jae-soo’ is a confusing story of resignation. Could it be an expression? ▷ Kim Yong-beom, Vice-Chairman of the Ministry of Finance (At the time, Vice-Chairman of the Financial Services Commission): Now that I think about it, there were a lot of interrogations when I was investigating, but I would have explicitly, if instructed to resign, the government officials organization would have done... We thought that it was difficult to be in the position of the head of the Financial Policy Bureau, but we thought it was dismissal from the job, but since the person who talked about it was different, it was obviously not possible to think of disciplinary dismissal. I did it. Not at the time. |
Instead, in the'court of law', former Minister Cho and former secretary Won-woo Baek focused on digging into the law. Instead of a plea that'he clearly communicated his intention to receive his resignation', he emphasized that'the Civil Affairs Office has no authority to demand resignation from members of the Financial Services Commission'. It was a witness newspaper to break legal cracks in the prosecution's prosecution that the Blue House Civil Affairs Office put unreasonable pressure on the Financial Services Commission to prevent the Financial Services Commission from properly addressing Jae-soo Yoo's case.
| ▶ Former Minister Cho Kook Attorney:'I haven't received a report to organize my resignation as Yoo Jae-soo, and if I had been instructed to resign from the Blue House, I would have received the resignation immediately', but I have the authority to give an order to receive the resignation from the civil administration chief's office. ? ▷ Choi Jong-gu, then Chairman of the Financial Services Commission: Well, generally, we wouldn't do that, but if we deserved resignation because it was the result of inspection for more than a month, of course we would have done that too. If I had to get to the point of resignation, I would have asked. But I didn't think of getting resigned because I didn't. |
The question of the lawyer to the effect of ``the Civilian Chief's Office does not have the authority to instruct the Financial Services Commission to receive a resignation'' does not exactly match the clarification of ``resignation'' that former Minister Cho made in the public opinion court. I can see it. This difference in positions revealed between before and after entering the court of less than half a day shows a condensed aspect of the trial in this case in'two courts'.
● Two charges of'abuse of ex officio' and'revocation of work'
Newspapers to the effect that the Financial Services Commission were also responsible were followed. If the orders from the Civil Affairs Office were unclear, the Financial Services Commission should have requested inspection data from the Blue House and then conducted self-inspection, but the Financial Services Commission did not.
| ▶ Former secretary attorney Baek Won-woo: What I want to ask is that Baek Won-woo told Kim Yong-beom about the results of the Blue House inspection, but you can't know what it means to refer to personnel. What does it mean? You just have to gather with the Vice Chairman's Personnel Manager and ask the Blue House. There is no reason not to ask. You just need to ask for data. ▷ Jong-gu Choi, then Chairman of the Financial Services Commission: Referencing personnel is not a reason for disciplinary action. However, it is customary to do it on your own. |
In response, former chairman Choi Jong-gu and former vice-chairman Kim Yong-beom protested that'it was difficult for the Financial Services Commission to realistically take additional measures under the supervision of an institution called the Blue House Special Superintendent.
Another keyword appeared in the process of asking where to take responsibility. It is a crime of'reservation of work' that is applied when you have not done your job duties. Former secretary attorney Baek Won-woo discussed the fact that former Chairman Choi Jong-gu was also accused of abandonment of duty, and emphasized that the prosecution's alleged structure was inappropriate, saying,'Former secretary Baek Won-woo is the subject of ex officio abuse, and the Financial Services Commission is a victim of abuse of authority'. . In addition, the former Chairman Choi, who was accused of'being of duty,' asked whether he was under pressure that he could be converted into a suspect during the prosecution's investigation, and raised suspicions about the prosecution's investigation process.
| ▶ Former secretary attorney Baek Won-woo: I will prepare a prepared newspaper. Did you hear that you can change your status to the suspect when being investigated, you don't have to say anything unfavorable, and you can not state anything unfavorable for the content of the statement? ▷ Jong-gu Choi, then Chairman of the Financial Services Commission: I think I heard that. ▶ Former secretary attorney Baek Won-woo: Did you recognize that'if I don't mind, I'll be the subject of investigation'? ▷ Jong-koo Choi, then Chairman of the Financial Services Commission: I didn't think that I would be the suspect in the investigation. ▶ Former secretary attorney Baek Won-woo: After the first investigation, have you ever been accused of abandonment or abuse of authority? ▷ Jong-gu Choi, then Chairman of the Financial Services Commission: Yes, I heard that the opposition party accused him. |
By the way, the charge of ‘reservation of work’ was also brought out by the prosecution at the beginning of the second trial held on June 5. It was in the process of announcing that the prosecution would consider preliminary addition of a charge of'reserving of duty' to the complaint of former Minister Cho. The prosecution said that the actions of the homeland's chief civil servant may be considered a'reservation of duty', so he would seek additional legal judgment. The lawyers strongly opposed it. He criticized the prosecution for using irrational numbers for criminal punishment, saying it was unreasonable to put conflicting things into the complaint, one that did something and what did not.
| ** During the second trial on June 5th ▶ Prosecutor: The defendant said it was, but the contents of the opinion submitted last time defended against the defendant's ex officio abuse and said, ‘Abandonment of duty may be established, but ex officio abuse is not allowed.’ Abuse of authority and duties Given that abandonment is an offender and omission, the Supreme Court has never seen that ex officio abuse and abandonment are explicitly absorbed. ▷ Former Minister Cho Kook Attorney: We have never said that we will be abandoned. In the case law,'reservation of work' means that nothing has been done, and it cannot be said that it is compatible with'obstruction of the exercise of rights, making work without obligations'. It is strange for the prosecution to change the prosecution, seeing that we are defending. ▶Prosecutor: It is not a sport, and it is not that we will respond. Our position is to seek judgment if the basic facts are the same. |
Contrary to the existing claims of defendants Cho Kook and Baek Won-woo that ``we decided to resign and ended the prosecution,'' the testimony that ``we have never been told to receive resignation'' came to the attention of the prosecution's decision. The prosecution has not yet submitted an application for a change of the complaint, but it is known that the trial process will be reviewed and a conclusion will be reached soon. If a request for a change in the complaint is submitted, adding a charge of abandonment, Cho's opposition that the prosecutors will use a'iron stick' to criminally punish him is expected to be even more intense.
The differences in the focus of the three defendants' jurisprudence in the jurisdiction were once again revealed. It was in the witness newspaper of the lawyer's side of the former anti-corruption secretary, Hyung-cheol Park, which was held briefly once.
| ▶Hyung-Chul Park, Former Anti-Corruption Secretary Attorney: At this time, when the witness contacted him and wanted to contact him to learn more directly, did the special supervisory team try to contact Yoo Jae-soo to inspect him, but did you know that he could not proceed with the inspection because he did not receive contact? ▷ Kim Yong-beom, 1st Vice Minister of the Ministry of Finance (At the time, Vice-Chairman of the Financial Services Commission): I didn't know at that time, but I knew it after the news report. ▶Hyung-Chul Park, Former Anti-Corruption Secretary Attorney: That's all. |
Former anti-corruption secretary Park Hyung-cheol, who was a bit closer to the area of'Provision of Yoo Jae-soo' rather than'Notification of the Financial Services Commission' at the time, emphasized that'the anti-corruption secretary did all possible inspection in a situation where he was not even contacted by his direct supervisor.' Former secretary Park, who is a little free from controversy about the authenticity of the'Notice of Acceptance of Resignation', did not actively appear in the witness newspaper this time.
● Opportunities missed countless times
Opportunities that have passed several times have also been revealed through the witness interview process, until today's situation where the Attorney General is prosecuted and public opinion is divided after a high-ranking official's charges of misconduct. Two witnesses, Choi Jong-koo and Kim Yong-beom, who have risen to the top government positions as elite civil servants, say they have repeatedly confirmed the intention of the Blue House, a senior leader, on the issue of the treatment of oil jae-soo. At the time, Vice Chairman of the Financial Services Commission Kim Yong-beom testified that he inquired several times with the then civil affairs secretary at the time when Yoo Jae-soo was being inspected, after receiving notification of Yoo Jae-soo's misconduct, and when Yoo Jae-soo wished to recommend the Democratic Party's chief expert committee member.
The media coverage and reporting process were also revealed. At the time, Vice Chairman Kim Yong-beom had been reported by various media about Yoo Jae-soo who did not go to work after paying sick leave from around November.At the end of November, there were reports that ``Jae-soo Yoo is being investigated by the prosecution,'' but to protect the organization, ``received under prosecution investigation. It is not true.' In retrospect, the media reports that'Director Yoo Jae-soo is being investigated by the prosecution on charges of misconduct' was wrong, but it was not completely lacking in actual truth.
The column that a reporter who entered the Financial Services Commission at the time released in the form of a reflection sentence after suspicion of police officer Yoo Jae-soo was raised last year was also mentioned in the trial. JoongAng Ilbo reporter Han Ae-ran said in a column titled ``I reflect on the Yoo Jae-soo incident'' on December 4, 2019, a high-ranking official from the Financial Services Commission at the time in January 2018 said, ``Yoo Jae-soo is being inspected by the Blue House, but it was never paid.'' We introduced an anecdote that we closed our coverage. Vice-Chairman Kim Yong-beom testified that he was the high-ranking official who refused to report, saying,'It is absolutely not that Jae-soo Yoo received the money.'
Several investigations and prosecutions that began with Yoo Jae-soo's allegations of misconduct, and the social costs still incurred in the trial process. It is certainly sad for the citizens who have to bear these costs that they have not been able to correct things and missed them despite the numerous opportunities.
● Reasons for recording processes that may be forgotten The
best way to win in the court of public opinion is to win in the court of law.
Kendle Kopi, the author of the book mentioned at the outset, advises on strategies for responding to the'court of public opinion', but in the end says winning the'court of law' is the most important. It is the outcome of the trial that determines the evaluation of public opinion, so the various technical responses in the court of public opinion must be focused on winning the court of law. The author's conclusions appearing later in the book remind us that the outcome of the trial is the one that has the greatest influence on the social evaluation of a case.
However, it is becoming more evident as the trial proceeds in this case that it is neither possible nor desirable to fully evaluate the'prosecution's suspicion' of the Moon Jae-in government's civil affairs chief's office only with the results of the sentence. Just as the accused convicted cannot say that'there was nothing to look back on in the prosecution investigation and media reporting in this case', even if the court of law is acquitted, all the appearances the defendants have seen in the'court of public opinion' It cannot be justified.
'I know that it is presumptuous for a reporter on the financial committee to write reflections each time. I am writing this article because I hope for the reflection of the people in charge of the Yoo Jae-soo case.' At the end of the column, the reporter reflecting on the time he entered the Financial Services Commission wrote: It seems that the word'reflection' has already come too far for the two courts of this case to bet on too much. Nevertheless, I hope that the results of the trial will not erode everything that has been revealed in the trial process, so after some time, we hope that the records of this process will be used meaningfully as our society reflects on people as well as institutions.
The trial will be followed by a newspaper next Friday, witnessing the head of the Financial Services Commission's Personnel Manager, who was in charge of personnel Yoo Jae-soo at the time. The court decided to put an end to the trial on the charges of'prosecutor's muma' after going through the witness newspaper Yoo Jae-soo and newspapers on the defendants of Korea, Baek Won-woo and Park Hyeong-cheol in September and October.
**References
<The
Controversy between Public Opinion, Law, and Justice>, as Kendle Kopi, as well as Kwon Oh Chang [opening a laptop] Reflecting on the Yoo Jae-soo case, JoongAng Ilbo, 2019.12.04