The special counsel investigating alleged favoritism in the Seoul–Yangpyeong Expressway case led by Kim Keon-hee filed an appeal after a first trial court dismissed an indictment over a bribery case involving a Ministry of Land, Infrastructure and Transport assistant director that was uncovered during the probe.
The Kim Keon-hee special counsel said on the 27th it submitted a notice of appeal in the case of an assistant director surnamed Kim at the Ministry of Land, Infrastructure and Transport (MOLIT), who was indicted on charges of bribery under the Act on the Aggravated Punishment of Specific Crimes.
The Criminal Agreement Division 22 of the Seoul Central District Court (Presiding Judge Cho Hyeong-woo, senior judge), the first trial panel, dismissed the indictment on the 22nd. Dismissal of indictment means the court finds that the indictment itself does not meet the legal requirements and therefore does not proceed to a ruling on the merits.
While serving as director of the Road Management Bureau at the Wonju Regional Office of Construction and Management between June 2023 and Nov. 2024, Assistant Director Kim was indicted on charges of receiving 35 million won in cash and about 1 million won in golf merchandise vouchers from the head of Construction Company A in return for helping the company win a contract for a national highway retaining wall method service.
The Kim Keon-hee special counsel said that while investigating allegations that the Ministry of Land, Infrastructure and Transport (MOLIT) sought to grant favoritism by changing the Seoul–Yangpyeong Expressway terminus route to where land owned by Kim Keon-hee's family is located, it found 5 million won in cash during a search of Assistant Director Kim's residence, traced the source of the funds, confirmed bribery allegations, and brought a separate indictment.
In a 34-page ruling, the court found that "the special counsel's investigation into the facts of this case exceeded the investigative authority granted by the special counsel act." It added, "Because the scope of the special counsel's authority to indict and maintain the indictment is the same as the scope of the special counsel's investigative authority, the authority to indict and maintain the indictment in this case does not lie with the special counsel."
With the Kim Keon-hee special counsel filing an appeal, the scope of investigative authority and the authority to indict and maintain the indictment—the premises for the dismissal ruling—are expected to become focal issues again on appeal.