
The Public Prosecution Office has decided to revise the established regulations for the leniency system for voluntary reporters of collusion and take charge of direct filing and decision-making on leniency, but confusion in the operation of the system is expected as the Serious Crimes Investigation Office (Serious Crimes Investigation Office) is also establishing a reception policy.
AI-generated summary
With the enforcement of the revised Criminal Procedure Act on the 2nd of this month, the investigative power of prosecutors was abolished and the Central Investigation Agency was launched, creating a vacuum in who would operate the leniency system.
(Seoul = Yonhap News) Reporter Choi Yun-seon = The Public Prosecution Office has decided to revise the established regulations related to the leniency system for voluntary reporters of collusion cases and take on the responsibility of accepting voluntary reports and deciding on penalty reductions.
However, confusion is expected as the Serious Crimes Investigation Office has also decided to take over the leniency.
According to the legal community on the 25th, the Public Prosecution Office revised the ‘Guidelines on the Processing Procedure for Applications for Penalty Reduction in Cartel Cases’ on the 16th.
The leniency system is a system in which individuals or companies involved in collusion are not indicted or have their sentences reduced if they voluntarily report and cooperate with the investigation and trial.
According to the revised regulations, the Public Prosecution Office receives and reviews voluntary reports from companies, etc., and if it determines that it is necessary to proceed with the procedure, it sends the original materials, such as the application form, to the investigative agency.
Afterwards, the investigative agency will proceed with the investigation and transfer the case, and the prosecutor of the Public Prosecution Office will make the final decision on punishment reduction.
Previously, the legal community pointed out that with the implementation of the revised Criminal Procedure Act on the 2nd of this month, the investigative power of prosecutors was completely abolished and the Central Investigation Office was launched, leaving a vacuum in the hands of the operator of the leniency system.
Lenience was applied based on the established rules of the Supreme Prosecutors' Office (currently the Public Prosecution Office) rather than laws, and it was not decided who would operate it and on what basis in the process of separating investigative and prosecution powers.
This revision of the Public Prosecution Service's regulations is interpreted as an attempt to resolve this problem.
However, as the Heavy Water Administration recently established a policy of accepting voluntary reports of leniency, confusion over the operation of the system itself may continue.
It has been reported that the Heavy Water Administration recently confirmed the application process for leniency and announced the acceptance policy internally.

Acting Justice Minister Lee Jin-soo announced on the 26th in a comprehensive audit of the Legislation and Judiciary Committee of the National Assembly that he is internally reviewing various legal alternatives, including the introduction of a protective custody system to prevent repeat crimes of violent criminals.

Singer Yoo Seung-jun also won the second trial of the third lawsuit he filed seeking to cancel the refusal to issue a visa to enter Korea. The Consulate General in Los Angeles objected to this and filed an appeal to the Supreme Court.

Special counsel Min Joong-ki's team requested a five-year prison term for former Vice Land Minister Kim Oh-jin over alleged favoritism in the 2022 relocation of the presidential residence.

With the sentencing of high school girl murderer Jang Yoon-ki to life imprisonment, the government is again pushing for the introduction of ‘life imprisonment without parole.’ While those in favor of permanently isolating violent criminals and protecting victims' human rights, there are strong opposing arguments, including the lack of effect in preventing crime and blocking the possibility of reform.

On the 23rd, the Seoul High Court acquitted Seoul Mayor Oh Se-hoon, who was indicted on charges of violating the Political Fund Act. The newly submitted 'Myung Tae-gyun transcript' in the second trial served as decisive evidence to reject the credibility of Myeong's statement. The special prosecution team took issue with the selective submission of transcripts and announced its intention to appeal.

Chief Judge Koo Hoe-geun, who found Seoul Mayor Oh Se-hoon not guilty, is from Gwangyang, Jeollanam-do and graduated from Yonsei University Law School. He also previously found former President Yoon Seok-yeol not guilty in the appeals court in the case of violating the political fund law.