[Report file] Why the prosecution? Did Lee Jae-myung raid Gyeonggi-do on the scheduled date of the investigation?

<1>

The last Tuesday, September 6, was the day when the Seoul Central District Prosecutors' Office, which is investigating the case of Lee Jae-myung, the Democratic Party leader's violation of the election law, ordered Lee Jae-myung to be investigated as a suspect in the election law violation.

On the night of the 5th, CEO Lee Jae-myung gave a written reply to the phone and said that he would replace the investigation.

As the statute of limitations on the election law case is three days away (until midnight on the 9th), the prediction that the prosecution will decide the case as it is was prevailing.

However, on the afternoon of the 6th, the prosecution raided the Gyeonggi Provincial Office.

Jae-myung Lee served as the Governor of Gyeonggi-do from 2018 to October 2021.

When I saw the breaking news of the search and seizure, I thought, "If CEO Jae-myung Lee came directly to the investigation as notified by the prosecution, the news of the seizure and search would have been delivered while he was being investigated."

It was certain that there would be a strong backlash from the opposition.

Of course, the opposition party strongly protested, saying, "It is a political show that intentionally directs the appearance of the opposition leader under investigation" when news of the prosecution's seizure and search was delivered in a situation where Chairman Lee Jae-myung took his place in writing.

Enlarging an image

<2>

Were there any cases where ① a presidential candidate and ② a representative of a major opposition party were summoned before the Chuseok holiday, or were there investigations and prosecutions?

The prosecution must have been careful in handling this case as the party involved in this case is CEO Lee Jae-myung, and it would have been forced to consider the impact the investigation will have.

In particular, how will the breaking news of investigations, which are inevitably known during investigations, affect public opinion?

In the case of the prosecution's seizure and search of the Gyeonggi Prosecutors' Office, the Public Official Election Act stating that the statement "I don't know" about the late Seongnam Urban Development Corporation Director Kim Moon-ki, who died while serving as a presidential election candidate last year, appeared on TV and was investigated for the 'Daejang-dong development' was false. It's a violation.

Among the election law cases, Lee Jae-myung, who was the subject of investigation by the prosecution, has several election law cases, but first, we will discuss only the charges of seizure and search against the Gyeonggi Provincial Office.

Enlarging an image

This case was prosecuted at the end of last year, and the prosecution has been looking into the case since the presidential election in March of this year, and conducted a search and seizure three days before the statute of limitations expired.

The site of the search and seizure was the office of the spokesperson of the provincial government and the office of the person who was in charge of public affairs when Lee Jae-myung was in office in the past as mayor of Seongnam.

This is the first time that the Gyeonggi Provincial Government has been seized and searched in relation to this case.

Since the search and seizure is nearing the expiration of the statute of limitations, there has been a lot of talk among reporters saying, "There will be no time for forensics, but what is the meaning of a search and seizure now?"

Even if there are meaningful forensic results in the future and further prosecutions are contemplated.

Also, as to the reason for the search and seizure, it was expected that CEO Lee Jae-myung's remarks on the air were improvised, in the expectation that questions would be shared from the broadcaster in advance or questions about the death of the late Director Kim Moon-ki It is said that he was trying to confirm whether he had planned in advance by saying that he did not know.

Enlarging an image

<3>

I wondered when the prosecution filed a search and seizure warrant with the court.

It was September 1st when the prosecution notified CEO Lee Jae-myung of the subpoena investigation.

If we divide the time period, ①before the notification of the subpoena investigation (1 day before) ②After the notification of the subpoena investigation, the period of receiving a response to a written investigation by phone (1st to 5th) ③Notifying Lee Jae-myung that he will receive a written investigation It must be after the afternoon of the 5th when I received it.

In the case of ①, it can be pointed out that the prosecution received the warrant in advance and deliberately set the time for the search and seizure to the summons date, considering the normal time it takes for the prosecution to request and issue a search and seizure warrant to the court.

However, considering the usual investigation method that emphasizes smuggling, I think it would be reasonable to get a warrant and delay the execution by quite a bit.

If that's not the case, it is bound to be criticized for having obtained a search and seizure warrant (although it is a family situation) and executing the warrant in consideration of the specific circumstances and timing.

In the case of ②, after the notification of the summons and investigation, there was an immediate backlash from the opposition and a search and seizure warrant was requested.

Since the inside text message 'It's a war' was reported in the media from Lee Jae-myung's side, the prosecution must have been prudent in requesting a search and seizure warrant.

Rather, it can be seen that after seeing the reaction of the opposition, they even requested a search and seizure warrant for those who had previously assisted in the public affairs work of CEO Lee Jae-myung in order to handle the case clearly.

Also, from the standpoint of the Democratic Party and supporters of President Lee Jae-myung, the seizure and search carried out in the midst of the Chuseok holiday would not have seemed welcome.

This is the part that the prosecution has to endure while investigating this case.

In the case of ③, realistically, I think that it is difficult in terms of time.

However, a search and seizure warrant was requested on the afternoon of the 5th, and the warrant was issued the next morning.

In addition, according to media reports, it is known that the answer submitted to the prosecution after CEO Jae-myung Lee notified that he would receive a written investigation was limited to 'five lines' or less.

Of course, it seems that the prosecution received this written response by mail on the morning of the 6th, but the prosecution expected that Lee Jae-myung's written response did not meet expectations, or the actual response was insufficient to decide the disposition The possibility cannot be ruled out entirely.

Of course, the question remains as to whether this family had to search and seize after the period during which investigations were possible after the March 9 presidential election.

Enlarging an image

<4>

The reason we discussed the timing of the search and seizure of the Gyeonggi Prosecutor's Office for such a long time is because this case targets the most politically sensitive people among the current investigations in Korea.

Therefore, it is necessary to carefully examine all the law enforcement processes of the prosecution that deal with this case, and the inner thoughts in the process.

In particular, the prosecution and the Democratic Party have been in conflict since the last government, from the so-called 'examination and overhaul' phase at the beginning of this year, to the 'complete inspection' of Justice Minister Han Dong-hoon.

Even if the prosecutors say that we are not a group that engages in strife. 

There was also a fierce battle for truth about the process of the prosecution's request for a written investigation from CEO Jae-myung Lee first and the response of CEO Jae-myung Lee after that.

If I explain, the article will be long, so I will substitute the article I wrote at the time.

<"Lee Jae-myung was summoned for not responding to the written investigation"...

"I was preparing an answer"> - Article dated September 2, 2022 - In response to

the Democratic Party's criticism that it was a summons for the purpose of disgrace, the prosecution first requested a written investigation from Representative Lee on the 19th of last month, but there was no response for a week. explained that it was notified.

Then, the Democratic Party explained that the prosecution sent written answers to two of the remarks related to Baekhyun-dong and Daejang-dong among the three cases that the prosecution gave as the reason for subpoena, and explained that they were preparing an answer for the case of Director Kim.

The prosecution responded that one of the two written responses submitted by the representative was to the police, and the other was a case unrelated to this subpoena investigation.

Source: SBS News Original Link: https://news.sbs.co.kr/news/endPage.do?news_id=N1006883630&plink=COPYPASTE&cooper=SBSNEWSEND

<5>

Prosecutors indicted CEO Lee Jae-myung on charges of violating the Election Act on the afternoon of the 9th, just before the Chuseok holiday and the expiration of the statute of limitations.

The remarks regarding the late Director Kim Moon-ki and the remarks related to the Baekhyeon-dong development project were judged to be in violation of the Public Official Election Act.

However, the remarks about the Daejang-dong development project that 'there was no report related to the excess profit recovery clause' were dismissed from prosecution.

The prosecution turned over CEO Jae-myung Lee to trial, and was quite confident in 'proving guilt', especially in relation to the charges related to the late Director Kim Moon-ki.

A Prosecutor's Office official

said, "From the point of view of the investigation team, the suspicion of Daejang-dong development became a hot election issue in the presidential election, and in particular, it became a bigger controversy after the death of Director Kim Moon-ki. Therefore, we judged that it was necessary to block the relevance of Candidate Jae-myung Lee to the development of Daejang-dong, so we decided that candidate Lee Jae-myung made a false statement

. From the point of view of the investigation team, we are confident that we have proven enough to rule out reasonable suspicion.”

It is natural to say that this is a case in which the prosecution was confident in proving the charges, but when I compared other cases that the prosecution has dealt with recently, I wondered if there were any cases in which the prosecution was confident enough to prove the charges.

In particular, it was a part of the prosecution's inner feelings that the subject of indictment should not cause any controversy as he is a presidential candidate and representative of the opposition party.

Moreover, CEO Lee Jae-myung was directly or indirectly involved in various investigations such as the suspicion of Daejang-dong development conducted by the Seoul Central District Prosecutors' Office, the Suwon District Prosecutor's Office's suspicion of paying Ssangbang's attorney fees, and the Seongnam FC investigation being investigated by the Seongnam District Office.

Whether or not it leads to prosecution (whether it leads to prosecution or non-prosecution) will be the first test to justify the pride of being a 'normalized prosecution' that Justice Minister Han Dong-hoon and the current prosecutors self-proclaim.

The prosecution's indictment last week was a disposition made to handle cases that were short of the statute of limitations.

It is also said that there are still several hurdles left in the mountain of great conflict that the prosecution and representative Lee Jae-myung must face.

The prosecution repeatedly emphasizes that 'we will investigate as the evidence points', but if we look at the past, the prosecution's investigation and the political reaction to it have always made Jeongguk into a typhoon.

This coverage file started with the question of "Why did the prosecution carry out a search and seizure on the scheduled date of the investigation by CEO Jae-myung Lee?"

I hope that the Democratic Party's backlash as a 'political show' is only a reasonable suspicion raised by the person being investigated, and not the real intent of the prosecution.

Prosecutors are still investigating too many cases that will become embroiled in conflict.