“This is the first time this law has been applied” · “The sentences are awkward”… Comprehensive special prosecution trial continues to point out

Court for unfair intervention in residence relocation: “What if I just write four letters about the indictment?” In the ‘martial law bus’ trial, it was pointed out that “the order of facts of the indictment is not correct”

(Seoul = Yonhap News) Reporter Lee Bal-eum = The court hearing the case of First Lady Kim Kun-hee and People Power Party lawmaker Yoon Han-hong's alleged unfair intervention in the relocation of the presidential residence expressed doubts about the application of charges by the second comprehensive special prosecution team.

Recently, in each trial of a case indicted by a comprehensive special prosecutor's team, the court's criticism continues.

On the 19th, Seoul Central District Court's Criminal Agreement Division 22 (Chief Judge Cho Hyeong-woo) said, "I have not experienced the application of this article to such cases," regarding the alleged violation of the Tax Criminal Punishment Act at the trial preparation date for the alleged case of obstruction of the right to abuse of power by Ms. Kim and Rep. Yoon.

The comprehensive special prosecution team charged 21 Gram CEO Kim Tae-young with violating the Tax Offender Punishment Act after concluding a construction contract in the name of Wondam Construction and other companies during the construction of his official residence and failing to issue a tax invoice.

The court said, "In our experience, false tax invoices are usually cases in which data is created and services are provided to evade taxes. We'll look for it, but it won't work. It seems a little different."

The special prosecutor said, “We have reviewed and filed an indictment,” and “We will provide an opinion if legally necessary.”

It was also pointed out that the special prosecutor's explanation of the evidence list was poor.

On this day, Rep. Yoon's lawyer requested that the purpose of the proof be stated in the evidence list, and the special prosecutor said, "We will review it later and reflect the necessary parts."

Then the court said, "It's not a review, it has to be written down. What if I just write down the four letters of the indictment?" and ordered, "It should be enough to make it possible to find out which item it is related to. Please supplement it with references."

In the trial of Kim Sang-hwan, former head of the legal affairs office at the Army Headquarters, who was indicted on charges of boarding the so-called 'martial law bus', it was pointed out that the sentences of the indictment by the second comprehensive special prosecutor's team were awkward.

Seoul Central District Court's Criminal Division 37-1 (Chief Judge Jang Seong-hoon, Oh Chang-seop, and Ryu Chang-seong) said at the first trial date on the charge of incubating civil war against former Chief Kim, "The sentence saying that he boarded the bus and that the bus departed from and returned to the Joint Chiefs of Staff to form the Martial Law Command is awkward."

He said, "I think it would be easier to understand if boarding the bus came first and the situation was established later," and "It seems like the main charge is 'for the formation of martial law,' but the order of precedence does not seem to fit."

Former Director Kim was indicted on charges of boarding the so-called 'martial law bus' that went from the Army Headquarters in Gyeryong University, South Chungcheong Province to the martial law situation room to perform his duties as martial law Minister of Justice even after the National Assembly passed the request for the lifting of martial law.

Former Director Kim's side denied the indictment in the case and pleaded not guilty.

The comprehensive special investigation team viewed the act of boarding the bus as inciting a riot, but it was not clear which riot was involved.