A first-trial ruling comes today on allegations that former President Yoon Suk-yeol received opinion polls worth 270 million won for free from political broker Myeong Tae-gyun. Because first lady Kim Keon-hee, who was tried separately on the same charge structure, was acquitted in both the first trial and the appeals trial, the issue is whether the panel in Yoon's case will reach a different conclusion.
The Seoul Central District Court Criminal Agreement Division 33 (presiding judge Lee Jin-gwan, senior judge) will hold the first-trial sentencing hearing at 2 p.m. on the 13th for Yoon and Myeong on charges of violating the Political Funds Act. This is the fifth first-trial ruling among the eight criminal cases Yoon is facing.
Prosecutors allege that Yoon, in collusion with the first lady, received for free from Myeong a total of 58 opinion polls worth 270 million won from April 2021 to March 2022. Myeong was charged with making an illegal political donation by providing the polls free of charge.
The special counsel investigating Kim Keon-hee says Yoon, leveraging his status as a leading candidate, received expensive opinion polls and, in return, exerted influence so that former People Power Party lawmaker Kim Young-sun would be nominated in the 2022 by-election for the National Assembly. At the closing hearing, the special counsel sought four years in prison and a forfeiture of 137.2 million won for Yoon, and three years in prison for Myeong. Forfeiture is a procedure in which the state recovers profits obtained through crime.
Yoon's side has argued not guilty. They say there is no evidence that he asked Myeong to conduct the polls or promised compensation, and that he did not intervene in Kim's nomination.
The key is how this differs from the ruling in the first lady's case. Kim was acquitted in both the first trial and the appeals trial on charges of violating the Political Funds Act for allegedly receiving the same opinion polls for free from Myeong. The appeals court found that Myeong distributed the poll results not only to Yoon and the first lady but also to several others, and that it was hard to see the polls as a pecuniary benefit provided only to the couple.
If the panel in Yoon's case applies the same reasoning as the appeals court did in the first lady's case, the likelihood of acquittal increases. Conversely, if it finds that Yoon, as a presidential candidate at the time, was the substantial beneficiary of the polls and that there was a quid pro quo connected to the nomination process, a guilty verdict could result.