An associate of Jeon Seong-bae, known as Geonjin, received a final Supreme Court sentence of three years in prison on charges of taking money in exchange for promising to exert influence over a trial. It is the first case among the so-called three special prosecutors—insurrection, Kim Keon-hee, and the Marine who died in the line of duty—to reach a final Supreme Court ruling.
The Supreme Court's First Division (presiding Justice Seo Kyung-hwan) on the 11th upheld the lower court's sentence of three years in prison and a forfeiture of 400 million won for a person surnamed Lee, who was indicted on charges of receiving a brokerage bribe under the Act on the Aggravated Punishment of Specific Crimes. The Supreme Court rejected Lee's appeal, finding the grounds for appeal improper.
In principle, the final appeal is a review of law. If a defendant fails to properly assert the statutory grounds for appeal, the Supreme Court may dismiss the appeal without reexamining the case. This includes when no statement of grounds for appeal is filed, or when, in cases with sentences under 10 years, the only claim is that the sentence is unfair.
Lee was taken into custody and indicted in Aug. last year on charges of taking 400 million won as a bribe for trial fixing, after saying in substance, "If you ask Geonjin, who is close to the president and spouse, powerful politicians in the People Power Party, and high-ranking legal figures, you can be acquitted at trial."
The Kim Keon-hee special prosecutor's office said Lee acted as a so-called legal broker who linked people seeking to quash investigations or gain advantages in trials to Jeon.
The court of first instance found all of Lee's charges guilty and sentenced Lee to two years in prison and a forfeiture of 400 million won. Both the special prosecutor's office and Lee appealed, and the appeals court increased the term to three years in prison. The 400 million won forfeiture was maintained.
The appellate court strongly criticized the act of taking money by dangling trial fixing, saying it undermines trust in the judiciary. The court said, "If the public suspects that trial proceedings are swayed by improper external influence or 'transactions,' the mere existence of such suspicion will shake the rule of law to its core and inflict fatal damage on the fairness of criminal procedure."
It continued, "The defendant's crime goes beyond causing financial loss and constitutes a grave offense that shakes the independence of the courts—the last bastion of the rule of law—the fairness of trials, and the general public's trust in judges' performance of their duties," adding, "Severe punishment commensurate with that is necessary."
Lee challenged the appellate ruling, but with the Supreme Court rejecting the appeal, the three-year prison sentence was finalized.