Yoon Seok-yeol "X files" controversy growing

(Source- 언론알아야바꾼다 youtube 6.27) Results of handling of Yoon Seok-yeol family suspected cases. 1. Yoon Seok-yeol suspected in interference resulting in coverup of mother in law's rehabilitation hospital case; disposition - not indicted. 2. Yoon Seok-yeol- interference in case of mother in law inducement of perjury; result - case dismissal. 3. Yoon's wife, Kim Geon-hee- forged official document in a real estate contract; disposition - not indicted. 4. Yoon's mother in law, fraud in connection with a real estate contract; disposition - not indicted.

(Source- 언론알아야바꾼다 youtube 6.27) Events in the Yoon Seok-yeol X-files argument: 5.25 - Song Yeong-gil, Democratic Party spokesperson reveals party is methodically preparing a file on Yoon Seok-yeol. 6.19 - Conservative pundit Jang Song-chol, says he's seen the Yoon X-files and believes that it will be difficult for the public to select Yoon (as a president). 6.22 - Yoon responds that this constitutes dissemination of falsehoods and an illegal investigation the responsibility for which should be made clear. X file main contents: 1. Yoon's personal history with his wife and mother in law; 2. His wife's business and investment activities; 3. Investigations which Yoon is suspected of covering up.

(Source- 언론알아야바꾼다 youtube 6.27) This graphic outlines a scheme by which Yoon's mother in law Ms. Choi and her partners, illegally formed and operated a medical organization. Allegedly, Choi and her three partners formed a foundation to establish and operate a treatment facility with a purpose to defraud. Allegedly Choi was pushed out of management as a director in 2014. Three partners have already been convicted, but Choi was not prosecuted on the basis of a "waiver memorandum" (allegedly) provided to her by the partners absolving her of legal liability (Choi has no medical credentials). On November 24, 2020, Choi was indicted for violating medical laws and suspicion of fraud. The diagram alleges that the government health insurance agency made unlawful payments of over 2 billion won to the convalescent facility established by Choi and her partners over a period of two years beginning in May 2013. Results from Ms. Choi's first trial are expected to be announced soon.

According to TK of Ask a Korean and The Blue House, contentions in the X-files against Yoon and his family are only "speculation" at this point. Meaning that they have never been proven in court. There has been a prosecution repertoire of stalling, nolle prosses, and allowing statutes of limitations to expire. Beyond this, various fraudulent acts, consistently denied or attributed to others, have resulted in the apparent teflon-like quality of Yoon's wife and mother in law in respect to legal process. That's the whole point really, that the South Korean mainstream press, the prosecution and the judiciary collude to protect their own. The problem now is that Yoon is no longer prosecutor general and it is likely that powerful people behind the scenes in the maneuvers for control of the opposition party and the forthcoming presidential campaign have no desire to be saddled with Yoon's professional and family baggage. The wholesale demotion and transfer of the Yoon coterie or faction inside prosecution offices recently carried out by the new justice minister may disable this mechanism for the time being. This blog has been assessing the allegations made against Yoon and his family for over a year now and it is apparent that that the complaints filed against not only Yoon's family members but also his subordinate, Han Dong-hun, and conservative politicians have been stalled and diverted primarily due to political bias in the administration of justice. This is, after all, the fundamental policy reason why the 20th National Assembly passed the prosecution reform legislation and why the conservatives opposed it.

The disciplinary committee appointed by former Justice Minister Chu Mi-ae had found Yoon culpable of unprofessional behavior including unlawfully investigating judges, abandoning political impartiality, and interfering in a case in which his subordinate had a legal interest. The administrative review court that blocked the execution of the (tepid) disciplinary sanction on Yoon (a two month suspension from duty) with an injunction was simply wrong. Yoon's arguments concerning the illegality of the disciplinary committee's actions were recently dismissed by the Constitutional Court on June 24 in a 6-1 decision, as legally insufficient.* So no speculation there concerning his professional misconduct in so far as it was addressed legally.

*윤석열 제기한 '검사징계법 헌법소원', 각하…어떤 뜻? 유영규 기자, SBS 뉴스 6.21; 원본 링크 : https://news.sbs.co.kr/news/endPage.do?news_id=N1006367683&plink=COPYPASTE&cooper=SBSNEWSEND