The arrest warrant for Lee Jae-myung, leader of the Democratic Party of Korea, was dismissed early on the morning of the 27th. Seoul Central District Court chief judge Yoo Chang-hoon, in charge of warrants, said at around 2:23 a.m. on the same day after examining the warrant for 9 hours and 17 minutes the previous day, “It is difficult to say that there is a reason or need for detention to the extent of excluding the principle of non-custodial investigation.” The arrest warrant was dismissed. Representative Lee, who was awaiting the results of the warrant review at the Seoul Detention Center in Uiwang, Gyeonggi Province, was released.
On the 18th, the prosecution requested an arrest warrant for CEO Lee, charging him with three charges, including ‘illegal remittance of money to North Korea’, ‘preferential development of Baekhyeon-dong apartments’, and ‘inciting perjury’. Regarding the charge of instigation of double perjury, Chief Judge Yoo said, “It appears that the charges have been proven.” On the other hand, regarding the suspicion of preferential development of apartments in Baekhyeon-dong, “There is considerable suspicion that CEO Lee was involved in the exclusion of the corporation’s participation in the project, but at this point, the direct evidence on this is insufficient, and the suspect’s right to defense is limited.” “It seems difficult to determine,” he said. Regarding the suspicion of Ssangbangwool’s illegal remittance to North Korea, he said, “Based on the relevant data to date, there is room for dispute regarding the suspect’s awareness, collusion, degree of involvement, etc.”
Chief Judge Yoo also ruled, “It is difficult to say that there is concern about the destruction of evidence.” Chief Judge Yoo said, “In the case of the perjury teacher and the Baekhyeon-dong development project, it is difficult to say that there is a risk of evidence destruction in light of the human and material data secured to date.” In the case of the charge of remittances to North Korea, “there are circumstances that raise suspicion of inappropriate intervention by people around the suspect,” but citing the lack of data to conclude that Representative Lee was directly involved, “we conclude that there is concern about the destruction of evidence.” “It’s difficult to do,” he said.
When news of the dismissal of the warrant for스포츠토토 Representative Lee was heard, about 150 supporters gathered in front of the Seoul Detention Center chanted “Lee Jae-myung.” Democratic Party lawmakers gathered at the site, including Rep. Hong Ik-pyo, who was elected floor leader of the Democratic Party on the 26th, Chung Cheong-rae, Park Chan-dae, Seo Young-kyo, Jang Gyeong-tae, Ko Min-jeong, Kim Young-jin, Moon Jeong-bok, Yang Lee Won-young, Cheon Jun-ho, Kim Seung-won, and Kim Won-i, were also delighted.
The following is the full text of the reasons for dismissing CEO Lee Jae-myeong’s arrest warrant as revealed by Chief Judge Yoo Chang-hoon.
① Let’s look at the explanation of the charges. The charge of perjury appears to have been cleared. In the case of the Baekhyeon-dong development project, there is considerable suspicion that the suspect was involved in the exclusion of the corporation from participating in the project when considering the suspect’s status, related approval documents, and statements of those involved. However, there is no direct evidence regarding this. At the current insufficient time, it seems difficult to conclude that the suspect’s right to defense, which is being refuted from a factual or legal perspective, has reached the point where it is excluded. In the case of remittances to North Korea, based on the relevant data to date, including the statement of Lee Hwa-young, a key person involved, there appears to be room for dispute regarding the suspect’s awareness, collusion, and degree of involvement.
② Concerning concerns about destruction of evidence. In the case of the perjury teacher and the Baekhyeon-dong development project, it is difficult to say that there is a risk of evidence destruction in light of the human and material data secured to date. In the case of remittances to North Korea, there are circumstances to suspect inappropriate intervention by people around the suspect in relation to Lee Hwa-young’s statement, but there is insufficient data to conclude that the suspect was directly involved, and Lee Hwa-young’s existing statement to the investigative agency is insufficient. It is difficult to say that there is no arbitrariness, and given that changes in statements are ultimately the area of judgment on whether the statements are credible, the situation of the suspect attending a separate trial, and the fact that the suspect is the current representative of a political party and is the subject of public surveillance and criticism, the evidence It is difficult to conclude that there is a risk of destruction.
③Combining the degree of need to guarantee the suspect’s right to defense and the degree of concern about destruction of evidence as seen above, it is difficult to say that there is a reason and necessity for the suspect’s detention to the extent of excluding the principle of investigation without detention.