Prosecutors have cleared a Korean Japanese, Kim Byung-jin, who was accused of being a spy while studying in Korea in the 1980s, issuing a no-charge decision after 43 years.
The Seoul Central District Prosecutors Office said on the 28th that it had "reopened, ex officio, a case that received a suspension of indictment (deferred prosecution) in Nov. 1983 for violating the National Security Act and issued a no-charge decision." It said Kim submitted a petition requesting cancellation of the suspension of indictment, and the office reviewed the intent of the petition and past case records.
Prosecutors said they determined it appropriate to issue a no-charge decision for the petitioner's past case, which had been subject to a suspension of indictment, after comprehensively considering factors including that the Defense Security Command (Boansa), which did not have investigative authority over civilians, conducted the investigation and illegally detained Kim, and that in a retrial of a co-defendant, a person surnamed Seo, a not-guilty verdict was finalized in Aug. 2017.
Previously, Kim was sent to the then Seoul District Prosecutors Office in Nov. 1983 on charges including violating the National Security Act for allegedly entering Korea in 1976 on orders from Seo, identified as a guidance officer for pro-North operations targeting the South, and collecting state secrets, and he received a suspension of indictment. He was known to have been taken to the Defense Security Command during the investigation, where he was tortured while being illegally detained for an extended period.
Article 20 of the National Security Act provides that prosecutors may suspend the filing of an indictment, taking into account factors such as the motive for the crime and circumstances after the offense for a person who committed a crime.
Among historical injustice cases, a person who was indicted and received a final guilty verdict may seek a retrial under the Criminal Procedure Act, but a person who received a suspension of indictment has no separate remedy procedure that the party can pursue. Accordingly, prosecutors reopened the case ex officio and issued a no-charge decision. Kim is said to be the first such case.
Prosecutors said, "We will continue to faithfully fulfill our role in upholding due process and guaranteeing human rights as a representative of the public interest and an objective law enforcement agency in past human rights violation cases."