◀ Anchor ▶
Suspected “impeachment” case in which a sitting prosecutor and Representative Woong Kim, People’s Power, exchanged letters of accusation against passport officials at the time.
However, the prosecution did not proceed with the prosecution, saying there was no evidence that Representative Woong Kim directly received the charge.
However, when the prosecution first looked into the case, it was clear that Representative Woong Kim had received the complaint.
made public at trial.
As questions arose about the prosecution’s non-prosecution process, the Crime Investigation Bureau of senior officials decided to investigate this part.
Reporter Jung Sang-bin told the story.
◀ Report ▶
In September last year, when the suspicion of “charge” was first raised, the prosecution reviewed the allegations and handed the case over to the Criminal Investigation Bureau for senior officials.
Eight months later, the aviation ministry’s prosecutor Son Jun-seong was prosecuted and the report was released during the first prosecution review during the trial.
The prosecutor wrote in the report, “It has been clearly proven that the author and sender of the message were Son Jun-seong and Kim Woong.”
When the judge asked whether the prosecution investigator, who appeared as a witness today, believed it was delivered in the order of Son Jun-seong and Kim Woong-soon, he replied, “Yes.”
The Airlift Ministry also saw that Congressman Kim’s collusion was acknowledged and asked the prosecution to take off his prosecutor’s clothes and deal with Congressman Kim, who was a civilian.
However, four months later, the indictment cleared Congressman Kim of the charges.
What is the reason for the change of judgement?
In another report released to the court, the prosecution forensic investigator referred several possibilities to the chief prosecutor, saying, “Someone between Son Jun-seong and Kim Woong could be involved, or there could be a third party who filed the complaint. in the first place .”
In other words, there is the possibility that the two are not colluding and have not directly exchanged complaints.
It was ruled completely different from the first report, but the investigator who appeared in the report denied it in court.
“I have never been asked about the possibility of a third party intervening, and even if I had asked, I would not have been able to explain it because I did not know,” he said on the witness stand.
This report was written by the lead prosecutor and the affiliated investigator together, against the forensic investigator.
On the 15th, the Democratic Party of Korea filed a complaint against the Chief Prosecutor and others in Airlift, who decided to immediately launch an investigation.
In order to verify whether the charge of creating false public documents can be enforced, we have requested the court for an accurate court statement and expect to assign the case to the Investigation Department tomorrow.
The prosecution explained: “The content of the report indicates that we need to check the delivery route of the claim, so there is no reason to write false.”
This is MBC News Jeong Sang-bin.
Video Editing: Min Kyung-tae
MBC News awaits your report 24 hours a day.
▷ Telephone 02-784-4000
▷ Send an email to [email protected]
▷ Kakao Talk @ MBC report
