The conviction of former senior prosecutor Kim Sang-min on charges that he handed an expensive artwork to first lady Kim Keon-hee to seek a party nomination was reversed to guilty on appeal. The lower court had said it was hard to conclude the painting was delivered to Kim, but the appellate court recognized a violation of the Improper Solicitation and Graft Act based on the art broker's statements and how the painting was found.
The Seoul High Court's Criminal Division 6-2 (Judges Park Jeong-je, Min Dal-gi and Kim Jong-woo) on the 8th sentenced the former prosecutor to two years in prison, suspended for three years, for violating the Improper Solicitation and Graft Act. It also sentenced him to one year in prison, suspended for three years, for violating the Political Funds Act and ordered the forfeiture of a little over 41.38 million won.
In Feb. 2023, the former prosecutor was indicted on charges that he delivered Lee Ufan's painting "From Point No. 800298," worth about 140 million won, to Kim and sought favors including public appointments and a nomination for the general election. He was also charged with illegally receiving about 42 million won in election-related support, including lending fees and insurance for a campaign vehicle, from a businessman surnamed Kim while preparing to run in the 2024 general election.
Whether the painting was delivered decided the crux of the appellate ruling. The lower court found it hard to rule out the possibility that the painting was not delivered to Kim, citing, among other things, that art broker A partially recanted testimony in court.
The appellate court, by contrast, found that the main thrust of A's testimony was maintained. The bench said, "From the investigation stage, A consistently said the defendant asked to purchase the painting and, speaking in dialect, said '(she) really liked it.' Even if there were partial recantations, that does not render the overall testimony unreliable," adding, "It is reasonable to view that the defendant purchased the painting through A and paid the purchase price."
The fact that the painting was found at the home of the mother-in-law of Kim's older brother, Kim Jin-woo, also factored into the guilty verdict. The bench determined, "It appears the painting was provided to Kim Keon-hee and, when the special counsel team's probe ramped up, was moved along with other items owned by Kim Keon-hee via Kim Jin-woo to his mother-in-law."
The bench found that the former prosecutor was in a position to meet Kim directly, hand over the painting, and hear her reaction. It also recognized a connection between the provision of the painting and the president's official duties. The bench said, "It is reasonable to view that the defendant provided the painting to Kim in relation to broad official authority such as the ruling party's election duties of the president and the appointment of senior public officials."
The authenticity of the painting was also reassessed on appeal. After reviewing both the opinion of the Korea Art Appraisal Research Center, which deemed it authentic, and that of the Korea Galleries Association, which deemed it a forgery, the bench found the Korea Art Appraisal Research Center's opinion more credible. Accordingly, it also accepted the painting's price as 140 million won, as charged.
The ruling on the Political Funds Act charge matched the lower court's conclusion. The appellate court found that the former prosecutor violated donation limits under the Political Funds Act by having a businessman pay for campaign vehicle expenses and other costs while preparing to run in the general election.
The bench weighed the former prosecutor's status and the nature of the conduct heavily in sentencing. The bench said, "While serving as a sitting Director General-level prosecutor, (the defendant) provided an expensive artwork to the president's spouse in connection with the president's duties, seriously undermining public trust and causing social controversy."
It continued, "Although the value of fairness required of the president, the head of the executive branch and the highest official responsible for state affairs, is beyond trade, (the defendant) sought to exert influence on official duties through the president's spouse," adding, "Given the high value of the painting and the grave nature of the crime, corresponding accountability is unavoidable."
On the Political Funds Act violation, it also noted, "As a legal expert who served more than 14 years as a prosecutor, (the defendant) would have recognized better than anyone the legal violation of (his) actions, yet asked for an illegal donation."
Earlier, the lower court recognized guilt only on the Political Funds Act charge, sentencing the former prosecutor to six months in prison, suspended for one year, and ordering the forfeiture of a little over 41 million won. The appellate court increased the sentence by also finding him guilty of violating the anti-graft law.