Kim Man-bae, the major shareholder of Hwacheon Daewoo Asset Management, a key figure in the suspicion of development preferential treatment and lobbying in Daejang-dong, Seongnam-si, Gyeonggi-do, is raising doubts as he gives a vague explanation or changes his words regarding the suspicion of the first real owner of the affiliated company Cheonhwa-dong.



According to the legal community today (12th), the prosecution investigated Mr. Kim, who was summoned yesterday, until dawn this morning, and confirmed the facts throughout the case, including the suspicion of the beneficial owner of Cheonhwa-dongin No.



Among the subjects that the prosecution has focused its efforts on in this investigation, there is a suspicion of the beneficial owner of Cheonhwa-dongin No.



In a transcript submitted to the prosecution by accountant Jeong Young-hak, the owner of Cheonhwa-dongin No. 5, it is known that Kim mentioned that "half of that belongs to him" about the dividend of Cheonhwa-dongin No. 1, which is 100% owned by Hwacheon Daeyu. .



Who this 'he' was was not specifically mentioned, but based on the statement submitted by Attorney Min-yong Jeong to the prosecution on the 9th, it was interpreted that he was referring to Yoo Dong-gyu, former head of the Seongnam Urban Development Corporation's planning division (incarcerated).



Lawyer Jung argued in his self-reported statement to the effect that 'He said that the former head of Hwacheon Daeyu, Cheonhwa-dongin No. 1, belonged to him and entrusted it to Mr.



As such, Kim's side denied the allegations that there was a separate actual owner of Cheonhwa-dongin No.



Kim's side issued a statement and said, "There is no fact that he said anything like that (that half of the dividend of Cheonhwa-dong is 'his'), and it is not true." I have no reason to share it with anyone."



However, Mr. Kim himself admitted that he made 'he' remarks.



After acknowledging that he had said 'him' when he came out of the prosecutor's office early this morning, Kim said, "I said that in order to prevent further conflicts with the former business owners from my point of view."



Kim's position was reversed again.




Kim's lawyer corrected that Kim had never made any remarks about 'him', saying that he may have made a mistake while being under investigation for a long time, or he may have answered the question without properly understanding the purpose of the question.



Prior to being investigated by the prosecution, Mr. Kim said that he deliberately told false information when he found out that accountant Jeong Young-hak was recording it, and said things that were difficult to understand under the circumstances.



It appears to be intended to emphasize that the statements made in the transcript are not true.



As such, Mr. Kim's position fluctuates over whether the remarks in the transcript were real, false, or misrepresented.



Mr. Kim has also been criticized for his unconvincing explanations.



Kim, who served as the head of the Money Today legal team, visited the Supreme Court building nine times from July 16, 2019 to August 21, last year, and 8 of these visits were written as 'Chief Justice Kwon Soon-il's office'.



Kim explained why former Supreme Court Justice Kwon, who was embroiled in controversy as a legal adviser to Hwacheon Daeyu, visited his office while he was in office, saying, "I wrote that for convenience and actually went to the barber shop in the premises of the Supreme Court."



However, the Supreme Court said in response to a written inquiry by the People's Power, "In principle, the staff in charge of access to the Supreme Court will proceed with the access procedure after confirming whether the applicant is scheduled to visit the office of the Supreme Court to be visited."



In the way Mr. Kim explained, it is virtually impossible to enter the Supreme Court building.



Some observers observe that Mr. Kim's change of words or an ambiguous explanation about the facts surrounding the suspicion can act as a factor against him.



In light of Mr. Kim's inconsistent attitude, the prosecution may consider a plan to investigate the arrest, taking into account the possibility of misrepresentation that may occur during the investigation process.



There are several other issues that the prosecution should investigate further against Kim in the future, besides the overall development process of Daejang-dong and the allegation of the beneficial owner.



Prosecutors are also investigating the specific roles of several former high-ranking legal figures, including former Supreme Court Justice Kwon, former Prosecutor General Kim Su-nam and former Special Prosecutor Park Young-soo, who were found to have provided legal advice to Hwacheon Daeyu.



(Photo = Yonhap News)