(Seoul = Yonhap News) Reporter Lee Young-seop = The appeals court in the case of Seoul Mayor Oh Se-hoon's violation of the political fund law found him not guilty on the 23rd and cited some of the contents of the 'Myung Tae-gyun transcript' that Mayor Oh had presented as evidence to support his innocence.
This newly submitted evidence in the second trial played a significant role in overturning the guilty verdict in the first trial.
Special Prosecutor Min Joong-ki's team is of the position that the circumstances in which this transcript was discovered are unclear and should not be accepted as evidence, so this part is expected to become a key issue in the future appeal trial.
On this day, the 7th Criminal Division of the Seoul High Court (Chief Judge Koo Hoe-geun) read Mayor Oh Se-hoon's second trial sentence and twice mentioned the "transcript of the phone call dated March 6, 2021" when denying the credibility of Mr. Myeong's statement.
This transcript is evidence submitted during the second trial by Mr. Kim Han-jeong, who was indicted as a supporter of Mayor Oh and the person who paid the poll fee to Mr. Myeong on his behalf, and contains the conversation between Mr. Myeong and Mr. Kim.
The court pointed out, "Myung Tae-gyun is testifying in court that while he was passing through the Jangbok Tunnel in Changwon on January 22, 2021, Mayor Oh called him four times, crying and asking him to 'take charge of the poll to defeat Na Kyung-won,' and that Mr. Kim would cover the costs."
He then pointed out that as one of the reasons why this statement cannot be believed as is, “It does not match Myeong Tae-gyun’s statement in the transcript of the call between Myung Tae-gyun and Kim Han-jeong dated March 6, 2021, submitted to the party trial.”
The transcript, which was previously played in court, included Mr. Myeong telling Mr. Kim, "Anyway, Oh Se-hoon doesn't know. Don't worry about not knowing. I'll take care of it."
Mayor Oh's side has argued that these remarks support that Mr. Kim requested an opinion poll from Mr. Myeong based on his own judgment, independent of Mayor Oh.
While appearing in court that day, Mayor Oh expressed confidence to reporters, saying, "Conclusive evidence (transcript) that was not submitted in the first trial was submitted."
On this day, the court denied Myeong's statement that Mayor Oh had asked Mr. Kim to pay for the poll costs and again mentioned the transcript.
Specifically, “Although Kim Han-jeong is somewhat vague in his statement about how he came to know Myung Tae-gyun, at least it appears that he learned of Myung Tae-gyun’s contact information through Kang Cheol-won (former Deputy Mayor for Political Affairs of Seoul) rather than Oh Se-hoon,” he said. “Such information also appears during the conversation in the transcript of the call between Myeong Tae-gyun and Kim Han-jeong dated March 6, 2021.”
The transcript had an influence on the rejection of Mr. Myeong's statements regarding 'request for an opinion poll' and 'request for payment of expenses', which are key components of Mayor Oh's allegations.
The special prosecutor's team has been arguing that the court should not adopt this transcript since Mr. Kim submitted it at trial.
The special prosecution team's view is that although Mr. Kim had the transcript file from the first trial, he did not submit it, and in the second trial, he selected and submitted only files containing content favorable to him.
After the sentencing on this day, Special Prosecutor Park No-soo also protested, saying, "Kim Han-jung originally had the file, but did not submit it because it had many unfavorable contents, and then submitted it at the appeals court, claiming it as if it had been newly discovered. This should not be accepted as it is evidence presented by deceiving the court."
It is known that the special prosecutor's team plans to mention in detail the reasons why the transcript should not be accepted as evidence in the appeal statement to be submitted to the Supreme Court.
Accordingly, it is expected that whether or not the transcript evidence will be accepted in the appellate trial will be one of the key factors in determining Mayor Oh's guilt or innocence.
Cases indicted by the special prosecutor follow the '6·3·3 principle' under the Special Prosecutor's Office Act, which requires that the case be handled within 6 months for the first trial, 3 months for the second trial, and 3 months for the third trial. Accordingly, the Supreme Court's ruling in Mayor Oh Se-hoon's case is expected to come out as early as the end of January.
However, since this is not a mandatory regulation, the court will not be subject to separate sanctions for exceeding the deadline.
