[Issue Plus] Prosecutors sentenced Kim Hye-kyung to a fine of 3 million won.First trial's "Tactile."

■ Host: Lee Yeo-jin, anchor Jang Won-seok
■ Starring: Attorney Kim Sung-soo

* The text below may differ from the actual broadcast content, so please check the broadcast for more accurate information. Please specify [YTN News PLUS] when quoting.

[Anchor]
The prosecution again demanded a fine of 3 million won for Kim Hye-kyung, the spouse of Lee Jae-myung, the leader of the Democratic Party, who is accused of violating the Public Official Election Act by using the Gyeonggi Provincial Government's corporate card.

On the other hand, controversy is brewing over allegations that Dahye, the daughter of former President Moon Jae In, made a "gap investment" in 2019, as well as allegations of illegal lodging businesses. Let's take a look at the news of the major incident with lawyer Kim Sung-soo. Welcome.

Suwon District Prosecutors' Office again demanded a fine of 3 million won for Kim Hye-kyung at its second final hearing yesterday. Could you please recap what happened?

[Kim Sung-soo]
Let me explain a little bit about the facts of the case. Won't CEO Lee Jae-myung appear in the presidential election around 2021? In order to run for the presidential election, the party holds a presidential election. And around August 2, 2021, it was a time when he declared that he would run in the Democratic presidential race. It was a time when he became a candidate, and at that time, Kim Hye-kyung, the spouse of Lee Jae-myung, had a meal with three spouses of former and current lawmakers of the Democratic Party. Four people ate, ate in the room, and outside, the driver, the driver, and the two attendants ate outside.

And in the case of Kim Hye-kyung's meal, the payment was made through CEO Lee Jae-myung's camp card, and the amount of about 104,000 won, or a little more than 100,000 won for the remaining six people, was paid with the Gyeonggi-do corporate card itself. As a result, I found out how the payment was made, and the person who made the payment at that time was a male entourage among the entourage at the scene, and the entourage told me that he had received instructions from Mr. Bae, who was in charge of the Gyeonggi-do Provincial Government. And there was also a recording about that.

Therefore, in this regard, when Bae made the payment, Kim Hye-kyung ordered this part.Or if there is a part of the contest, the candidate and the spouse of the candidate are not allowed to donate under the Public Official Election Act because they were candidates at the time. Then there is a regulation that is criminal punishment. Therefore, if it can be seen as an act of donation in this part, it was indicted because it should be criminalized, and the first trial is now over.

[Anchor]
In the second final trial, the prosecution said that the crime was serious regardless of the amount. What does this mean?

[Kim Sung-soo]
If you just look at the amount itself, it's 104,000 won, so the amount is not high, right? However, the reason why this trial itself is serious in this regard is that it violates the act of prohibiting donations under the Public Official Election Act, and based on the facts, isn't it the spouse of three current and former lawmakers and Democratic lawmakers? That's why this part can be a very important fact in such an election. That's why I think he appealed to the court about the importance of looking at this part seriously.

[Anchor]
Kim Hye-kyung said in her final statement yesterday that she was not involved in the crime, but that it is true that the situation is suspicious. What does this mean?

[Kim Sung-soo]
This gives the defendant the opportunity to make a final statement at the end of the trial. Then, you will tell the court what the defendant wants to say, and although he was not involved in the crime as shown in the subtitles, he thinks the situation itself is suspicious, but he did not, and he said he would be careful not to let this happen in the future.
Rather than seeing that
is an important part of the court's judgment, isn't there any evidence that the court will judge by specifying all the facts, such as witness testimony and related data? From these points of view, the main issue is whether Kim Hye-kyung was involved in the payment, so we will see to what extent it has been proved, and if it is proved, the final statement itself is an important part of the judgment of the court because it will make a legal judgment on whether it can be regarded as a donation under the Public Official Election Act.

[Anchor]
Bae, the secretary of execution who was accused of the same charges, was sentenced to 10 months in prison and two years of probation in the first and second trials, and this, that is, the payment of the meal fee, was confirmed, right? Then, as you said, the issue will be whether Kim Hye-kyung knew about this, so how do you judge it?

[Kim Sung-soo]
As you said in this regard, there are two issues at first. One is whether this part can be seen as a donation or an act that can be punished as a donation under the Public Official Election Act, and I know that there have been quite a few disputes over facts in this regard, but it is highly likely that this part is almost definitively recognized because he was convicted in the related case you just mentioned. Then, since Bae was convicted, there should be parts like Kim Hye-kyung knew about Bae's actions, ordered, or conspired.

Therefore, this was the main issue in this case, and the witness examination and other parts were carried out in that direction, so it seems that the court will first grasp the facts through the evidence gathered so far, and if the current court has not yet reviewed all the records, there is a possibility that it has not yet set its direction.

[Anchor]
The first trial sentence for Kim Hye-kyung is now scheduled for the 14th of next month, and Lee Jae-myung, who is suspected of violating the Public Official Election Act, is on November 15, that is, a day away. What can you do with the prospect of sentencing?

[Kim Sung-soo]
In the case of the prospect of sentencing, as I said, if the court has not reviewed all the records now, the facts are so complicated that it cannot be concluded, and there are testimonies from witnesses claimed by the prosecution, and there are testimonies from the other side and the lawyer, right? Since there are many conflicting facts, if these testimonies are mixed, there is a part that needs to be confirmed through other objective evidence, so the court is expected to review various things.

So as you said at first, the first trial was originally decided once. So, it was scheduled to be sentenced in August, but as the court was organizing the records, there were some questions about this. Therefore, if the trial is resumed once again, the trial has been resumed and such questions have been reorganized this time, so I wonder if the court will judge this data and conclude.

[Anchor]
Under the current law, the spouse of an elected official is sentenced to a fine of more than 3 million won, and if this is confirmed, the election will be invalid, but the prosecution demanded 3 million won. But even if 3 million won is actually ruled out, CEO Lee Jae-myung is not applicable?

[Kim Sung-soo]
First of all, the amount of sentence is usually less than the prosecution's sentence, so whether a fine of 3 million won will be sentenced or not, even if found guilty, that is something to watch first, and if 3 million won is sentenced, there is a provision in Article 256 of the Public Official Election Act. So, if a spouse or election secretary is sentenced to a fine of more than 3 million won or imprisonment, there is a sentence that invalidates the election in the relevant election. Now, this case itself is a part of the Democratic Party's presidential race at the time, and now Chairman Lee Jae-myung is a member of the National Assembly, right? So, even if this part is invalidated in relation to the parliamentary position, it is an unrelated case, so I think I can say that it can be viewed outside of the discussion.

[Anchor]
Nevertheless, there must be a reason why the prosecution asked for 3 million won, right?

[Kim Sung-soo]
As I said, 3 million won is more than 3 million won stipulated in the Public Official Election Act, so more than 3 million won is included. Therefore, it seems that there is an expectation that the amount of 3 million won itself means that.

[Anchor]
Let's also look at the next topic. Moon Da-hye, the daughter of former President Moon Jae In, has recently been in the spotlight due to various controversies. This time, allegations have been raised that a gap investment was made when purchasing a house in Yangpyeong-dong, Seoul, in 2019, so how can you judge when you buy it?

[Kim Sung-soo]
This is the fact that Da-hye bought a multi-family house in Yangpyeong-dong, Yeongdeungpo-gu, Seoul. However, around May 2019, I bought it by administering 760 million won, and if you look at the fund plan at that time, there was a villa in Gugi-dong, Seoul that Moon Da-hye had. 510 million won for the sale of this bill, 20 million won in cash, and 230 million won in rental deposits, so we're going to pay the sale price. It was said like this, but that's what gap investment is, right? I don't live, but I pay only the limited amount of the rental deposit while I have a tenant, and I buy a building like that. As people say that this is a typical gap investment, there are some opinions, and in the case of houses, they sold it for 900 million won in February 2021. So, if I bought it for the purpose of gap investment because I actually benefited from it, isn't it reprehensible? But this was the purpose of gap investment at the time of purchase, or after I went abroad, I went abroad at that time. Therefore, I need to look a little more into whether I was going to live after going abroad, so I think there will be some disputes about the facts about that.

[Anchor]
Gap investment is controversial because the Moon Jae In government at the time put out various regulations that focused on curbing speculative demand, so I think it is more morally criticized.

[Kim Sung-soo]
That's right. As you said, at that time, various policies came out to the extent that it was a war on real estate, and one of them was that people who had to live in multi-homeowners could not buy a house because of the very small amount of investment and profit from gap investment, right? As a result, there have been various policies on Gap-Two, and since this situation has been revealed that Moon Da-hye seems to have made such a gap investment, there are various opinions on this and there is a need to see how the fund source has been prepared.

[Anchor]
Meanwhile, Moon Da-hye was caught illegally operating a lodging business in a detached house in Hallim-eup, Jeju. Before that, wasn't there another controversy over the illegal lodging business related to officetels in Yeongdeungpo-gu?

[Kim Sung-soo]
That's right. In addition to the Yangpyeong-dong house, this house in Jeju Island and the officetel in Yeongdeungpo are all mentioned. So, as I said, the Yangpyeong-dong house is now sold in February 2021, so it seems that it does not belong to Moon Da-hye, but the two cases that are being mentioned now belong to Moon Da-hye. And since it appears to be owned by Lee, but the lodging business has been found, if you did not report it, you would have to report it, but according to Article 20 (1) of the Public Health Management Act, you will be sentenced to up to two years in prison or fined up to 20 million won. That's why if you don't report your lodging business, you'll be subject to criminal punishment. In the case of Jeju Island, the Jeju Provincial Police is reviewing the investigation, and the Yeongdeungpo-related police are considering the case. And if you don't report your lodging business, it's highly likely that your taxes haven't been paid. Because when we pay taxes, don't we report how we earned it? However, if you did not report your accommodation business, do you not pay taxes because you cannot report the cause in the end? If you evade taxes, the Tax Offender Penalty Act stipulates imprisonment for up to two years or a fine twice the amount of gains, and if you don't report your tax invoice, you can't issue cash receipts, right? Then, this part also stipulates imprisonment for less than a year or fines of less than twice the amount of gains, so it can be reviewed a little.

[Anchor]
What kind of punishment will you be if the police chief says he will investigate the allegations and all of them turn out to be true?

[Kim Sung-soo]
As I said, the Public Health Management Act and the Tax Offender Penalty Act seem to be able to be reviewed, and the level of punishment itself is about how long this operation has been carried out and how much has been gained, and whether one house has been built, two houses, or more. After grasping the circumstances, the law will judge that some punishment is appropriate accordingly. Then I think punishment will be carried out accordingly.

[Anchor]
On the other hand, the police investigating Moon Da-hye's drunk driving case reportedly raided an oriental clinic where the victim taxi driver was reportedly treated. The taxi driver was investigated by the police after the accident, but he didn't issue an injury certificate. What's the reason for the raid now?

[Kim Sung-soo]
There are areas where the legal application of this is completely different, and the case itself is receiving a lot of attention, so it seems that the search was conducted to clarify the facts more clearly. So, if there was a diagnosis of damage to the taxi driver related to Moon Da-hye during the search and seizure, the police can review not only drunk driving under Article 148-2 of the Road Traffic Act, but also dangerous driving injuries under the Special Act or injuries under the Special Act on the Handling of Traffic Accidents. If the injury certificate has not been submitted, it is often considered that no injuries have occurred. In this case, even if the injury certificate has not been submitted, it is a very important case. I think the search and seizure were conducted to accurately determine whether it was injured or not.

[Anchor]
By the way, have you ever raided a hospital where a victim of a car accident went?

[Kim Sung-soo]
I understand that the reason for the seizure and search was that under the medical law, when requesting data from hospitals, you have to apply through a warrant. That's why it looks like there was a raid and there could have been other needs. If there is a possibility that the data may not be submitted, or for that reason, the seizure and search may have been conducted, but I guess that wasn't the case.

[Anchor]
Then, how likely is it that the crime that will be applied in the future will be higher?

[Kim Sung-soo]
First of all, the court also has a wide variety of standards for injury, so if a medical certificate came out according to the facts, isn't there a medical certificate at the hospital at that time? If this medical certificate appears to be an injury to the police or the prosecution, we will prosecute all of the crimes I mentioned. The court will be prosecuted, and if so, the court will judge again whether it can be considered an injury, and if it is recognized as a dangerous value under the Special Price Act, even if it is two to three weeks before death, it is usually sentenced to probation. Therefore, the degree of punishment is inevitably different, and in drunk driving, a fine can be sentenced if it is a first-time offender, which becomes an important legal issue.

[Anchor]
Let's move on to the next topic. Yesterday, we gave you a breaking news at this time. Last evening, a large fire at the USFK supply warehouse in downtown Busan was extinguished in 19 hours. What's going on?

[Kim Sung-soo]
As you mentioned, there is a supply window for U.S. troops in Korea. It was a supply window of 55, which was in Busan, and a fire broke out around 6:30 p.m. yesterday. And the fire broke out and it seems that the fire was completely over by 1:45 p.m., 19 hours later. It seems that the situation was over, but understanding the facts, the fire seems to have occurred during the remodeling of the supply-related warehouse that stores military supplies. It is estimated like this now, but since there is no exact result about the exact cause or this yet, it seems that we will investigate for now. This is the situation right now.

[Anchor]
Usually, when a large-scale fire occurs like that, our fire authorities and related agencies go in to investigate the fire and announce the cause, but this time, it seems that it can't be announced because it's a U.S. military base.

[Kim Sung-soo]
We have a sofa agreement. In the case of sofa negotiations, crimes against the body of the family, the body of the family, the body of the family of the U.S. soldier, or property are the first agreements in which the U.S. has the right to investigate, so isn't this the supply window within the U.S. military? Therefore, the U.S. military has the primary right to investigate the supply chain, but we will also investigate the cause of the current incident with our local fire authorities, so we will have to wait and see.

[Anchor]
Originally, the U.S. military had its own suppression unit, but the incident was so urgent that we allowed our fire brigade to enter again, and now we are conducting a joint investigation. Of course, there is no obligation to disclose it under the sofa agreement, but can't you still reveal it to resolve the suspicions of the Korean people?

[Kim Sung-soo]
I think we need to see how to judge in that regard. If this is an important part of the military because it is inside the military, it may not be able to disclose it. That's why it seems to be a bit of an issue. However, there is a possibility that this cause itself is anxiety and there is room for additional damage to nearby residents, and whether the person responsible can claim damages may vary depending on what the cause was, so we need to see how it will proceed in that regard.

[Anchor]
So there's no reason to insist on asking the U.S. military to take responsibility directly?

[Kim Sung-soo]
If nearby residents suffer damage and try to claim damages for it, it is necessary to make the defendant unnamed or unnamed, and then confirm the facts. However, in order to confirm the facts, we need to be able to receive a report on the results of the investigation, but if we do not have this report here in Korea, we cannot secure it unless the U.S. military responds when applying to the U.S. military. Therefore, there may be a difference in the relationship of rights in this part because whether only the U.S. military will have this report or such data or whether the Korean authorities will receive it through a court application if some of them keep it. However, because it is within the U.S. military, if it is not disclosed for security reasons within the military or for this reason, the government has no choice but to consider this.

[Anchor]
Residents in the neighborhood who said they were damaged by fire smoke and smell, how can they be compensated?

[Kim Sung-soo]
As I told you, we need to take responsibility. However, if the person who caused this responsibility can be held liable for damages, and the cause cannot be known through reports or things like this, even if the lawsuit is filed, it is unlikely to be cited in the end, so we need to see how to confirm this. In addition, in the case of postponement or such damages, there are also areas where I have to think about the extent to which my damage has occurred and whether I can convert it into money, so it is right to decide whether to proceed with the lawsuit after reviewing that a little bit.

[Anchor]
I see. Issue Plus I was with lawyer Kim Sung-soo today. Thank you.