The court judged that the prosecution's disposition not to prosecute the case of perjury by Choi, the mother-in-law of President-elect Yoon Seok-yeol, was reasonable.
The Seoul High Court's Criminal Division 30 (Chief Judge Bae Gwang-guk, Cho Jin-gu, Park Eun-young) rejected the financial application filed by two people, including businessman Jeong Dae-taek, against Choi on the 25th.
The appeal is a system in which the complainant or accuser, who is dissatisfied with the prosecution's decision not to prosecute, asks the competent high court to decide whether or not to file an indictment.
If the court grants the award, the prosecutor must file a charge.
The court said, "If we look closely at the case record and all the materials submitted by the applicants, we can accept the prosecution's disposition of non-prosecution, and there is not enough data to otherwise admit that the above disposition is unreasonable."
Previously, Choi filed a lawsuit with Jung in 2003 over 5.3 billion won in profits from investment in bonds at a sports center in Songpa-gu, Seoul.
At that time, Mr. Jeong insisted that the profits should be divided in half based on the agreement signed with Mr. Choi in the presence of Mr. Baek, a lawyer, but Mr. Choi refused to pay the profits, saying that it was a forced agreement, and Mr. Baek also said that Mr. Choi was right. testified.
At the appeals court, Baek overturned the testimony, saying, "I paid a fee from Mr. Choi and perjured", but the verdict was the same.
Jung was accused of coercion and attempted fraud by Choi and was sentenced to two years in prison in 2006.
Afterwards, Choi was accused of falsely testifying that there was no attempt to reach an agreement in the criminal trial of Jung.
However, it is known that the prosecution did not acknowledge the fact that Mr. Choi tried to reach an agreement because the statement of Mr. Kim, who was the messenger, kept changing and it was difficult to believe.
Prosecutors believed that the statement of the mother of the mother of the mother-in-law submitted by Jung was not reliable, and that it was difficult to punish under perjury for simply not answering the newspaper.
The Supreme Prosecutor's Office accepted some of the contents of the re-appeal for reasons such as omission of some judgments during the investigation process and ordered a re-investigation to the Seoul Central District Prosecutors' Office in July, but the charges were again dismissed.