The Reform Party said that its analysis of the 31-year-old assault verdict against Democratic Party of Korea Seoul mayoral candidate Chong Won-o found that, although the candidate had said he fought because of the May 18 pro-democracy movement, in court he claimed diminished capacity, saying, "I drank a lot and don't remember."
Reform Party Seoul mayoral candidate Kim Jeong-cheol and Reform Party floor leader Cheon Ha-ram held a press conference at the National Assembly on the morning of the 19th and said they had obtained the missing portion of the assault case verdict against the candidate. The assault verdict had first been released by People Power Party lawmaker Joo Jin-woo, but part of the latter section was omitted. The verdict the Reform Party disclosed that day is the original, including the entire latter section.
The verdict released by the Reform Party says, "The defendant argues, in effect, that at the time of each offense in this case, the defendant was in a state of mental and physical impairment." The court said, "We acknowledge that a large amount of alcohol was consumed, but it does not appear that the defendant entirely lacked, or was in a weakened state of, the ability to distinguish right from wrong or to make decisions," and rejected the claim.
Candidate Kim Jeong-cheol, referring to this part of the verdict, said, "The candidate now says he 'fought because of the May 18 pro-democracy movement,' but in the past in court he claimed he was 'in a state of complete or partial loss of mental and physical capacity due to intoxication,'" and criticized, "If he says he can't remember because he drank, how does he remember so clearly that he fought because of the May 18 pro-democracy movement?"
He continued, "Our society has long criticized the issue of leniency for intoxication. There has been a public consensus that responsibility for violent acts should not be reduced just because someone drank," adding, "But the candidate, in the course of his own trial, argued loss and diminishment of mental and physical capacity due to alcohol."
Kim also flagged the absence of "discretionary mitigation" in the verdict as a problem. Discretionary mitigation is a procedure in which the sentence is reduced after considering various extenuating factors, such as the defendant's remorse or a settlement with the victim.
Kim said, "What the verdict shows is that there was no settlement with the victim that a judge could seriously consider in sentencing, no sincere remorse, and no indication that he apologized to the victim."
Kim said, "If, as he says, the verdict speaks for everything, then he should answer the public honestly before that verdict," adding, "What the public wants is not excuses. It is a truthful explanation."