(Seoul = Yonhap News) Reporter Park Jae-hyun = While the 'successful lobbying' battle continues over Justice Minister candidate Kim Seung-won's communication regarding approval of clinical trials for COVID-19 treatment, the prosecution investigating the case at the time appears to have judged it difficult to determine the illegality of the solicitation itself.
According to the Seoul Western District Prosecutor's Office's non-indictment decision dated December 27, 2024, obtained by Yonhap News on the 6th, the prosecution said, "It is difficult to conclude that the request itself is illegal," in response to Candidate Kim's request to expedite the approval of the clinical trial plan of a domestic treatment development company.
The prosecution explained that despite the request, the Ministry of Food and Drug Safety did not unusually violate regulations or manuals in this case, and that it was “confirmed that the review was conducted in accordance with prima facie procedures.”
He added that he also took into account the circumstances in which Candidate Kim, a member of the National Assembly, requested expedited processing at a time when COVID-19 was spreading globally.
This judgment is different from the ‘successful lobbying’ argument recently raised by independent lawmaker Han Dong-hoon based on phone calls and text messages.
One lawmaker revealed a phone call in which broker Mr. Yang told Candidate Kim that work was not passed on to the manager of the Ministry of Food and Drug Safety, and Candidate Kim responded, "It's blocked at the manager level? Got it."
At the time of being contacted by Candidate Kim, Minister of Food and Drug Safety Kim Kang-lip relayed the request to the manager in question, and also claimed that work that had been blocked due to Candidate Kim's involvement was handled.
Candidate Kim's side also acknowledges the fact that Candidate Kim received Yang's request and requested former Director Kim to expedite the process.
However, they claim that this was not a request to guarantee approval of a clinical trial or to influence the review results, but rather a “public interest complaint” requesting that the Ministry of Food and Drug Safety quickly review the submitted data in accordance with regulations and professional judgment.
This was a request to confirm related procedures to ensure that treatment development and clinical trials were not delayed during the time when COVID-19 was spreading, and it was not a request to skip the review process or give approval ahead of other companies.
Candidate Kim's side also emphasized that the approval result cannot be considered to have been achieved at Candidate Kim's request simply because there is a temporal relationship between contact and clinical trial approval.
Since the Ministry of Food and Drug Safety determines approval through its own review process, it is necessary to distinguish between the fact of contact and the impact it had on the actual review results.
The prosecution's decision not to indict in the past is also consistent with this explanation.
The decision was made by distinguishing between the fact that there was a request for expedited processing, the illegality of the request itself, and the appropriateness of the actual review process.
The court that previously heard the related case also judged that it was difficult to conclude that the request for expedited processing was a request for preferential treatment.
In the December 2024 ruling on the case of company operator Kang, the Seoul Western District Court acknowledged that Yang sent a text message to Candidate Kim on October 8, 2021, saying, "Please allow the Ministry of Food and Drug Safety to process the work more quickly," delivering treatment-related data to candidate Kim.
However, it was ruled that "it is difficult to immediately conclude" that Mr. Yang's request was a request for convenience, such as omitting the Ministry of Food and Drug Safety's original clinical trial approval review process or reviewing the company above other companies based solely on the fact that there were such text messages and phone calls.
The suspicion that he promised to pay donations in return for favors remains a separate issue.
In the non-indictment decision, the prosecution explained that candidate Kim was admitted to the charge of promising to receive 5 million won in donations in return for mediation, but that the indictment was suspended considering the fact that no actual bribery was taken and the promised amount was not large.
Mr. Kang and Mr. Yang, who are suspected of promising to pay bribes, have been sent to trial and the first trial is currently in progress.
The indictment in this case included the prosecution's claim that Candidate Kim asked for up to 5 million won in donations if things went well, as well as the content that Mr. Yang sent an email to Mr. Kang saying, "Please donate 5 million won to Rep. Kim Seung-won, who worked hard for the approval case."
Candidate Kim provided the donation account, and Mr. Kang tried to send money, but the supporters' association's annual fundraising limit had already been reached, and the fact that he was unable to send the money was also presented as grounds for quid pro quo.
Candidate Kim has filed a constitutional petition, claiming that the suspended indictment against him is unfair.
