A nullification-of-election verdict was finalized for Democratic Party of Korea lawmaker Lee Byeong-jin (Pyeongtaek-eul, Gyeonggi), who was accused of omitting part of his assets in a disclosure ahead of the 2024 general election.
The Supreme Court's First Petty Bench (Presiding Justice Shin Sook-hee) on the 8th upheld the lower court ruling that fined Lee 7 million won for violating the Public Official Election Act and 5 million won for violating the Real Name Real Estate Act.
When an elected public official receives a finalized sentence of imprisonment or a fine of 1 million won or more for violating the Public Official Election Act, the election is nullified. Accordingly, Lee will lose his seat.
Lee, who ran in the 2024 general election, was indicted without detention in October of the same year on charges (violation of the Public Official Election Act) of omitting from his asset disclosure a secured claim of about 550 million won on land in Sinbong-ri, Yeongin-myeon, Asan, South Chungcheong, securities worth a little over 70 million won, and an unsecured credit loan of about 50 million won. In addition, there is a charge of violating the Real Name Real Estate Act for jointly purchasing land in Yeongin-myeon with an acquaintance in Aug. 2018 and holding it in the acquaintance's sole name through a name trust as if the acquaintance had purchased it alone.
During the trial, Lee argued that the secured claim and the shares belonged to acquaintances, not to him. However, the first-instance court found him guilty and separately imposed a fine of 7 million won for the election law violation and 5 million won for the Real Name Real Estate Act violation. The first-instance panel found the claim was indeed Lee's property and said, "Failing to enter the reported amount of the claim itself is judged to be an omission committed with at least dolus eventualis."
Both Lee and the prosecutor appealed. The appellate court dismissed both appeals. The appellate panel said, "The act of omitting claims and shares during the asset disclosure process and thereby publishing false information deprived voters of an opportunity to vet the candidate, and the responsibility is not light." It also noted that Lee attempted to induce those involved during the investigation to avoid criminal punishment.
Lee again appealed, but the Supreme Court also found no error in this judgment and dismissed the appeal.