Prosecutors appealed the first-trial ruling that dismissed the indictment against former Supreme Court Justice Kwon Soon-il, who was sent to trial on charges of providing legal advice to Hwacheon Daeyu Asset Management without being registered as a lawyer.
According to legal sources on the 18th, prosecutors filed a notice of appeal with the Seoul Central District Court, which heard Kwon's Attorney‑at‑Law Act violation case.
Earlier, Kim Dae-gyu, presiding judge of the Seoul Central District Court Criminal Division 21 single-judge panel, delivered a dismissal of indictment for the former justice Kwon.
Kwon, after retiring, is accused of performing legal work related to administrative and civil lawsuits for Hwacheon Daeyu Asset Management, in which Daejang-dong developer Kim Man-bae is a major shareholder, without registering as a lawyer with the Korean Bar Association in 2021, and receiving 150 million won in advisory fees. Under the Attorney‑at‑Law Act, a person who has not registered as a lawyer and provides legal counseling or similar services for compensation is subject to punishment.
However, the court dismissed the indictment, saying the investigative process was unlawful. It said the Attorney‑at‑Law Act violation applied to Kwon does not fall within the scope of investigation initiation by prosecutors under the Prosecutors' Office Act. It also found unlawful that prosecutors sent the case to the Gyeonggi Nambu Provincial Police Agency in Jan. 2022 and took it back in September the following year. The reason was that the case was transferred to prosecutors even though a judicial police officer had not exercised the authority to conclude the investigation.
At the time, the court said, "After prosecutors unlawfully initiated the investigation, the case was transferred to the judicial police, but the police, premising their actions on the prosecutors' initiation, conducted only a few inquiries and cannot be seen as having commenced a lawful investigation," and added, "With no exercise of the police's primary authority to conclude the investigation, prosecutors' retransfer and investigation of the case meant the prior unlawful investigative state continued."