'Suspicion of Daejang-dong appeal waiver' Park Cheol-woo "I contacted the Central District Prosecutors' Office, but I did not give instructions."

“If opinions had been gathered, it would have been the ‘best’, but the Supreme Prosecutors’ Office and the head of the Central District Prosecutors’ Office coordinated directly.”

(Seoul = Yonhap News) Reporter Choi Won-jeong = Park Cheol-woo, head of the Seoul Central District Public Prosecution Office, said that he contacted the front-line prosecutors' office after the first trial ruling on 'Daejang-dong development corruption' in November last year, but never instructed or encouraged them to give up the appeal.

Commissioner Park responded as follows to a question from Rep. Park Hyeong-soo of the People's Power Party, who asked about the process of deciding to give up the Daejang-dong appeal during the audit of the National Assembly's Legislation and Judiciary Committee on the 19th.

Previously, Commissioner Park, as head of the anti-corruption department of the Supreme Prosecutors' Office at the time, was suspected of ordering the Daejang-dong investigation and trial team of the Seoul Central District Prosecutors' Office to "reexamine the appeal" on the afternoon of November 7 last year, the deadline for appeals in the Daejang-dong case.

Commissioner Park said, “I don’t remember the date, but I think I received a report from the Central District Prosecutors’ Office that I was going to appeal,” adding, “I did contact the Central District Prosecutors’ Office, but I never instructed or encouraged them to reconsider or give up the appeal.”

Regarding the details of the contact made to the Central District Prosecutors' Office, he did not say anything, saying, "It is not appropriate to recount because it is related to the internal decision-making process."

When asked whether he had received a message from the Ministry of Justice, where Minister Jeong Seong-ho (currently a member of the Democratic Party of Korea) was serving at the time, to 'carefully review the appeal', he replied, "I don't think I received it."

Commissioner Park Cheol-woo previously said in response to a question from People Power Party lawmaker Kim Tae-gyu, "Of course, a process in which opinions are suggested, collected, and coordinated from the prosecutor in charge of the front office, to the director, deputy chief, chief prosecutor, and the Supreme Prosecutor's Office researcher, division chief, planning officer, chief prosecutor, and president would be 'best'."

However, he said, “(The abandonment of the Daejang-dong appeal) was limited by time and for other reasons, it is difficult to say more because the decision was made by the person who was the head of the Supreme Prosecutors’ Office in direct coordination with the Chief of the Central District Prosecutors’ Office.”

Democratic Party lawmaker Seo Young-kyo, chairman of the Judiciary Committee, refuted that the first trial court in Daejang-dong sentenced former Seongnam Urban Development Corporation planning director Yoo Dong-gyu and lawyer Jeong Min-yong to higher sentences than the prosecution's sentence, saying, "Of course, there is no reason to appeal."

Commissioner Park also responded positively, saying, "The appeal standard looks at both the evidence relationship and the possibility of overturning the judgment." He added, "If you look at the actual benefits, the sentence would not have increased even if the not guilty part was changed to guilty."

Democratic Party lawmaker Lee Seong-yoon protested against the abandonment of the Daejang-dong appeal during the National Assembly inspection and demanded disciplinary action against the 18 front-line prosecutors who made a collective statement at the time.

Jeong Yong-hwan, acting head of the Seoul Metropolitan Public Prosecution Office, said, “If you have committed an act outside the scope of the law, you must take corresponding responsibility,” and added, “We will review the relevant parts (disciplinary action).”