Prosecutor Park Sang-yong won in part in a damages suit filed against former Democratic Party of Korea lawmaker Choi Kang-wook and others, saying his reputation was defamed by the so-called "Ulsan District Prosecutors' Office drinking party and feces allegation."
The Seoul Central District Court Civil Agreement Division 25 (Presiding Judge Kwon Ki-man, Director General) on Jan. 8 ruled in favor of the plaintiff in part in a damages suit Park filed against former lawmaker Choi and nine others, including Kang Mi-jung, former Rebuilding Korea Party Spokesperson.
The court ordered former Spokesperson Kang to pay 20 million won to Prosecutor Park. Of that, it held that 10 million won should be paid jointly by former Spokesperson Kang, former lawmaker Choi, and YouTuber Kang Sung-beom. It rejected the claims against Democratic Party of Korea lawmakers Lee Sung-yoon and Seo Young-kyo, among others.
The suit began with remarks about Prosecutor Park that spread through the National Assembly, politics, and YouTube in 2024. At the time, lawmaker Lee Sung-yoon said at a full session of The National Assembly's Legislation and Judiciary Committee that in Jan. 2019 more than 30 prosecutors at the Ulsan District Prosecutors' Office held a drinking party using special operation expenses. Lee also said a prosecutor suspected of being involved in the matter was the one who investigated the North Korea remittance case.
The controversy then escalated into more provocative claims. There were even comments to the effect that after the dinner, the prosecutor drank alcohol at the executive cafeteria inside the Ulsan District Prosecutors' Office building and smeared feces on places such as the restroom sink. Lawmaker Seo Young-kyo identified Prosecutor Park as the person in question at the Democratic Party's Supreme Council meeting.
The related content then spread repeatedly through YouTube broadcasts and elsewhere. Prosecutor Park filed suit in late July 2024, saying his reputation was severely damaged as unverified rumors were disseminated in an organized manner.
Prosecutor Park said on the prosecution's internal network at the time, "My reputation has been severely damaged by the organized spreading false information, and significant psychological harm has occurred."
It is interpreted that the court assessed the scope of liability by dividing the defendants' statements, the way they were disseminated, and the degree to which Prosecutor Park was identified. While it did not uniformly recognize liability for all political statements, it found that certain remarks and acts of dissemination constituted illegal acts that lowered Park's social evaluation.