Human rights expert calls for end to persecution of Cho Guk's family

(Source- OhMyNews TV youtube, 4.7.21)
"I look forward to Professor Chung Kyung-shim's speedy release from prison, and for freedom to return to Professor Cho Guk's family amid these hardships. I assert as long the cruel experience of Cho Guk's family continues, there is no justice," said Professor Baek.

Baek Tae-ung, Professor of Law and international human rights expert, calls for the immediate release of Cho Guk's wife, Chung Kyung-shim, from prison, and the reinstatement of daughter Cho Min's college degrees by the universities which removed her college admission credentials (and consequently her right to pursue a medical career). The two universties' administrative actions were based upon the questionable conviction in her mother's criminal trials for allegedly fabricating a volunteer service award to bolster her daughter's academic credentials for college admission. Professor Baek criticized the universities' decisions as well, saying they reflected an abandonment of academic autonomy and that they had the discretion to decide otherwise. Going forward, the prominent human rights authority, said he looked forward to the quick release of Professor Jung Kyeong-shim from prison, the restoration of Cho Min's professional college credentials and an end to the cruel continuing reality of Cho-Guk's prosecution and family situation. Cho Guk indicated he would pursue legal actions to challenge the university decisions.

(Source- OhMyNews TV youtube, 4.7.21) Cho Guk, "It's a situation as if I'm in a tunnel with a knife at my throat, and my ankles bound in shackles..." To the current president elect, Yoon Seok-yeol, Prosecutor General, at the time the prosecutions were initiated, which forced Cho to step down as Justice Minister: "Are you happy now?..." On facebook: "Now please apply the same standards to Yoon's wife and family as held to mine..."

Cho Guk is the former Justice Minister appointed during the Moon adminitration to implement critical reforms to the centralized prosecutors' offices in South Korea, which have been used to selectively prosecute political rivals and critics and, at the same time, to protect corrupt special interests in South Korea. The overwhelming power of the prosecution offices are not subject to meaningful checks and balances, and are therefore prone to political abuse. Some say this is a legacy of the former Japanese adminstration during Korea's colonial period, and also the abuse of the administration of justice during the period of dictatorships. Korea's centralized justice system is unique in this respect when compared to other modern "democratic" states. The continued abuse of judicial administration by prosecutors is a grave threat to South Korean democracy. Democrats in the National Assembly are now considering further measures to divest prosecutors of their monopoly on investigative and prosecutorial powers. On the other side, president elect, Yoon Seok-yeol, who will take office May 10, has indicated that he will strip the office of the Justice Minister of authority to conduct independent legal investigations, and further solidify the complete independence of the prosecutor general's offices from outside supervision or interference. The fear is that with the former Prosecutor General in the presidential office and his league of followers in prosecution offices, South Korea is facing potential tyrany.

*백태웅 교수, 조민 입학취소에…“정의는 없다”
입력 2022-04-07 16:25, 박선현 기자
https://www.etoday.co.kr/news/view/2121828

Baik Tae-Ung (born 1962) is Professor of Law at the University of Hawaii at Manoa William S. Richardson School of Law in Honolulu, Hawaii. He is Director of the Center for Korean Studies at the University of Hawaii at Manoa. A leading academic authority on transitional justice, social movement, and human rights in Asia, he specializes in international human rights law, comparative law, and Korean law.[1] Baik is a well-known former South Korean prisoner of conscience.

In 2015, he was appointed to the United Nations Human Rights Council [2] Working Group on Enforced or Involuntary Disappearances (WGEID) as an independent expert representing the Asia-Pacific region.[3] He is currently serving as Chair-Rapporteur of the WGEID after working as Vice-Chair for two years since 2018.

*https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Baik_Tae-ung

Hankyoreh article on Yoon campaign's "wife risk" doesn't go far enough

This article, "Yoon's hard line on "fairness" backfires," quoted, in part, below from today's Hankyoreh, may be one of the only English language news articles on the current crisis brewing over the Yoon presidential campaign in South Korea:

...It was revealed that in the resume Kim submitted to Suwon Women’s University in 2007 for an adjunct professorship, she falsely wrote that she served as an executive at the Korea Association of Game Industry and that she won the top award at the 2004 Seoul International Cartoon and Animation Festival. After submitting this resume, she was hired as an adjunct professor and worked at the university for 11 months.

Although Yoon’s remarks in the morning criticized the media coverage of his wife, he exhibited an about-face that afternoon. After his wife expressed her willingness to apologize to the public “for causing distress,” Yoon also changed his tone.

“No matter how much [my wife] may have to say on this issue, and no matter how much this feels like an unfair and planned offensive by the ruling party, if [she] was not able to live up to the high expectations of the public in even a small way then it is correct to feel apologetic,” he said.

“I just saw [her apology statement] and I think that her stance seems appropriate,” he added...*

*Yoon's hard line on "fairness" backfires, Hankyoreh, 12.16.21 by Kim Mi-na; https://english.hani.co.kr/arti/english_edition/e_national/1023629.html

(Source- 빨간아재 12.16 youtube) People's Power Party candidate for President Yoon Seok-yeol yelling at reporters for asking questions about wife, Kim Geon-hee's, teaching application record. "Raising suspicion is unjust!"

This is just the tip of the iceberg concerning presidential candidate Yoon, his wife, and mother in law. Mother in law Choi Eun-sun was for some reason not prosecuted in 2015, when her partners in a medical rehabilitation care financial fraud scheme were convicted and imprisoned. She was convicted after reinvestigation of the case earlier this year, sentenced to three years, jailed, and then released on appeal. There are recordings in which mother in law brags about revenge taken on at least one earlier business partner, whom she allegedly defrauded of approximately 2 million dollars. In another instance, the Deutsche Motors stock manipulation case, in which she and her daughter are allegedly implicated, she confided to an acquaintance in a phone conversation, that the statute of limitations has passed after an incriminating admission. In that case, similar to the medical fraud case, her daughter Kim Geon-hee, Yoon's wife, unlike other participants, has not yet been arrested and indicted. This year, Yoon himself has been found to have violated professional ethics by a Ministry of Justice disciplinary board by interfering in cases, abandoning poliical impartiality, and unlawfully investigating sitting judges as Prosecutor General. Yoon quit his office rather than submit to professional discipline. He was suspended from official duties for two months. The suspension was upheld by two reviewing courts. His harshest critics remark that Yoon's history requires that he run for office to keep from going to prison. (Why would one conduct unlawful investigations of sitting judges other than to improperly influence their decisions?)

Returning to his spouse's situation, she appears unable to make public statements without digging herself into a deeper hole. While she claimed her private affairs were being unjustly investigated by the press, she could not help refrain from a reference to the prosecution of former Justice Minister Cho Guk's wife over an alleged forged voluntary service certificate submitted as part of a college admissions package for her daughter. Reportedly, Yoon himself instigated this prosecution against this democratic political rival and his family. Cho Guk's wife was convicted of the forgery after a very unusual investigation and prolonged trial. It is likely that the evidence was obtained unlawfully by the state, interpreted incorrectly by government forensic experts, that exculpatory evidence was withheld at the time of forensic evaluation, and at trial, etc. True to form in political prosecution cases, the chief witness against Cho Guk's wife, was himself suspected of unlawful conduct at the time, and may have been subject to prosecutorial misconduct.

Yoon's wife had the nerve to claim that her repeated misrepresentations on her resume did not amount in seriousness to the offense charged against Cho Guk's wife. She then went on to say if her "mistaken representations of facts amounted to a crime, so it's a crime" revealing her genuine attitude. Candidate Yoon claimed that the accusatory reports and queries by the press represented a plan by the incumbent party. Yoon implied that the misrepresentations in his wife's record are mistakes rather than intentional, and immaterial to the selection process of hiring adjunct or affiliated "professors." So the reference to hypocrisy oft cited by conservative candidate Yoon to justify his prosecution of the former Justice Minister and his wife, "Ne ro, nom bul," may be the aphorism for the election campaign, "when I do it, it's love, when they do it, it's adultery." The repeated misrepresentations in Kim's academic resume may be grounds for showing wrongful intent despite the argument by Yoon that the misrepresentations are immaterial to the job selection process. What the teaching resume does reflect is the complete disregard for the truth which Ms. Kim apparently learned at home. Kim and Choi were slick operators, street wise, and knew how to use a corrupt legal system to their advantage before Kim married Yoon. Now, outside the courtroom on the main stage of presidential politics, their heretofore carefully hidden characters have become more apparent.

The apologies of Yoon and his spouse are in the insincere variety, of being sorry in order to meet public expectations. Ms. Kim was video taped yesterday, leaving her offices, having her face covered and pushed down by her handler to make a quick exit so she would not have the opportunity to respond to any other inquiries concerning her past behavior. Some in the conservative party have suggested that questions about Kim's honesty and ethics aren't germane because the party "didn't nominate her." It's a weak argument after putting Cho Guk's entire family at risk of criminal prosecution, issuing 80 warrants against them, forcing Cho from office, and convicting them in the press with leaks. The power struggle in South Korea over the control of judicial administration and the state is not over.

Cho Guk family defamation and the Yoon Seok-yeol X-files

The South Korean conservative media cartel is reaching new lows in its attacks on the former justice minister Cho Guk. Cho Guk was an advocate for reform of judicial administration in South Korea aimed primarily at reducing the almost unlimited powers of the prosecution offices. These offices have been used to politicize justice, trump up charges against politicians on the left, and prosecute them with perjured testimony, coerced witnesses, and otherwise falsified evidence. They also nolle prosse and stall cases against powerful business (chaebol) interests on the right, and suppress investigations of government corruption when it involves themselves. The overwhelmingly right wing media in South Korea cooperates in schemes with the conservative prosecution cabal, led by former Prosecutor General Yoon Seok-yeol, using information unlawfully leaked by prosecution sources to frame democratic politicians and progressive activists as guilty before a trial has even started.

In a Chosun Ilbo report, Cho Guk’s daughter and Cho Guk are portrayed in a graphic, as members of a prostitution ring, that steals the wallets of johns who procure their services. The images of Cho Guk in the doorway, wearing his emblematic black back pack, and his daughter, Cho Min, wearing her black ball cap (to disguise her appearance from harassing reporters who have been stalking her relentlessly), are borrowed to associate them with this newspaper report on a completely unrelated criminal enterprise. It’s a straight up blatant instance of defamation of which there have been scores against Cho Guk and his family.

(Source-MBC News 6.24 News Today youtube - graphic original source Chosun Ilbo online 6.21 성매매 기사 '조국 부녀' 삽화…조국 "면피성 사과" ) "First take a shower" Entice with prostitution then steal their wallet.

Circumstantially, this is related to two other developments, the first, is that Yoon Seok-yeol, the former prosecutor general who arranged for prosecution of Cho Guk’s family, perhaps for the first time in his career, is being subjected to unfavorable press coverage from some mainstream sources. Yoon is leading in the polls currently as the favorite conservative candidate for presidential office in the election next March. Currently, his mother in law is being tried for medical insurance fraud where she obtained government payments for rehabilitation services in a non-profit medical business she was not qualified to participate in. The other participants in the scheme are already in prison. Yoon claimed that no one ever lost a dime due to his mother in law’s investment schemes. However, the truth is alleged to be quite different. A verdict and perhaps sentence from her first trial is anticipated in early July. His mother in law has been involved in multiple fraudulent schemes and somehow was never held to account by the criminal justice system. The latest revelation in a series of scandals involves Yoon's mother in law and wife in a stock price manipulation scheme in which she and a director from Deutsche Motors, colluded to enter numerous bid and ask market quotes to double the price of the stock in which Yoon’s wife held substantial interest.

(Source- Hol Seu-hyung, 시사건건, youtube 6.23) Independent commentator Hol describes Deutsche Motors stock manipulation scheme.

There is digital and audio evidence of this scheme, which at least a few conservative pundits believe is “difficult to defend.” There is also a set of two documents called the X files allegedly outlining a series of unlawful acts by Yoon, Yoon’s mother in law, and Yoon’s wife. The actual list of crimes hasn’t been published, but one political pundit described a few of them. One of them is that Yoon interfered in an investigation of a Yongsan tax official who also happens to have the Yoon family name. Another allegation concerns his wife’s business commissions from art exhibitions arranged through her company Kobana Contents. Her exhibition commissions are typically in the tens of thousands dollars, the funds being received from corporate sponsors (chaebol families). Some allege that these fees are in fact a way of paying off her husband for official favor. Another question raised in addition to the Deutsche Motors stock manipulation scheme involves the issue of how Yoon's capital account reporting as a public official increased to above five million dollars when at the time of his marriage in 2012, he was not wealthy. He says this is my wife’s property. He was in public office the entire time. The underlying allegation is that his wife married him to use his official position as a prosecutor to protect herself and her mother in law from lawsuits and prosecutions involving their prior frauds including the Deutsche Motors scheme.

(Source- 언론 알아야 바꾼다, youtube June 22) Issues allegedly raised at a Yoon's prior confirmation hearing. Ostensibly, these could be the basis of contents of the so called X-files damaging Yoon's popularity and political support this week. 1. Yoon allegedly interfered in a bribery case involving Yoon Oo-jin, a tax office chief in Yongsan (denied); 2. Increase in sponsorship monies to wife's art exhibition business (denied, such contracts existed before (Yoon's marriage)); 3. Mother in law's illegal management of a rehabilitation hospital (denied, she was cleared of suspicion in the past); 4. Method of accumulation of 6.5 billion won in capital, (denied, most of this is my wife's property, the suspicions are baseless.)

Yoon denies all the allegations against him and his family. He says the claims are unsupported and that this is a political attack by the left. The so called People Power Party on the right, the main opposition party to the democratic administration, hasn’t embraced Yoon yet as a party member and candidate for president. Perhaps they are waiting for the trial of his mother in law to play out, and a determination whether a prosecution of the Deutsche Motors scandal can even take place considering the underlying facts are more than ten years old, raising a statute of limitations issue. Even the alleged coverup which appears to have started in 2013, may have taken place too long ago. It remains to seen if this could play a role as a campaign issue.

The second aspect is that Cho Guk’s new memoir concerning the railroad political prosecutions of his wife, Professor Chung Kyung-sim and himself, which are still underway, is selling 100,000 copies a week. The book and the independent media coverage of the book underline the corruption in prosecution offices and the media even as the trial hearings of his wife go forward. The chief witness against Cho Guk’s wife admitted on a recently disclosed audio tape (after she was convicted of “forging” an academic certificate for her daughter and sentenced to four years in prison) that he did it to remove any possibility that, Cho Guk, a “pro-China and pro-North Korea” politician, could become president of South Korea. He claims he thereby saved South Korea from the ravages of poverty, civil war, and destruction. The witness, Choi Song-hae, is the former president of Dongyang University. It is alleged in some independent journalism reports that Choi’s academic credentials are falsified, and that he was suspected of financial self dealing at the time he was asked by prosecutors and apparently also by conservative party members to testify against Cho Guk’s wife, a professor at the University.

Lee Jun-seok, the new leader of the People Power Party (the South Korean conservative opposition) says if the X-files contents are cause for ethical censure, then the contents should be revealed as they must be evaluated. It appears the party would like to get the issues resolved early on, so questions about Yoon's ethics don't blow up the party's campaign for president in later stages.

South Korean political "show trial" of Professor Chung Kyung-shim

last edited May 13, 2021


Professor Chung is the spouse of former Minister of Justice, Cho Guk. Cho Guk's wife was sentenced to 4 years in prison in December 2020, in large part, for allegedly forging a service award certificate for her daughter to fraudulently facilitate her entry into a university medical program. The former Justice Minister appointed by the democratic Moon Jae-in administration, was forced out of office by this indictment of his wife, and his own related indictment. He was accused of financial misconduct, destruction of evidence, abuse of his office, and other related charges. He had been in office for just over one month and was a major proponent of reforming the conduct of prosecution and judicial administration in South Korea, which is overtly politically driven. The relevant charges against Professor Chung discussed below pertain solely the charge(s) of forging a Dongyang University award certicate for her daughter, Cho Sim, to facilitate a corrupt or unfair admission process to univerity programs.

There are so many defects in the prosecution's case against Professor Chung, Cho Guk's wife, it's hard to keep track:

1. No chain of custody on the computer seized by police from the college lecturer's lounge at Dongyang University that allegedly produced the forged award certificate. The professor's computer was taken under prosecution control at the University lounge, moved to Professor Chung's assistant's office and "evaluated" without following proper legal and forensic procedures (no record of search, no authorized representative of defendant present, removing the entire computer on a pretextual basis, no return or detailed record of the data taken provided to defendant, all in violation of government investigative policy). The prosecution operated the computer in an irregular fashion for forensic evaluation, not using the safe mode. The prosecution inserted a USD drive with no witnesses present, and then claimed that the computer hard drive failed at that point. They did not provide the defendant's attorneys with access to the hard drive until the very end of the first trial.

(Source- 닥쳐라정치 youtube, 5.10) Graphic shows the computer IP address record for Bongbaedong (Seoul) ending in 137 and the portion excluded from the first trial by prosecutors for Dongyang University (Cheongju) ending in 112.

2. Intentional concealment of exculpatory evidence. No record was kept of what prosecutors did to the computer. This includes evidence found on the computer by defense forensic experts that someone, while the prosecutors had the computer under their control, inserted a usb drive into the computer for a short period (one minute thirteen seconds) with no record of what the purpose was, what may have been taken from or introduced into the computer. The prosecution stated the USB introduced a search program to distinguish the evidence it sought on the hard drive. This was done outside the presence of an office aide of Professor Chung, who was asked to leave the room at the University. The prosecution then concealed those actions, the associated data, and attempted to cover up whatever they did from defendant, defendant's counsel and the court. In fact during the first trial, the state's forensic evidence was never entirely transmitted to the defense for examination. The history of IP addresses on the computer in question was falsified by the prosecution according to trial observers. Defense attorneys characterized the record as "contaminated" or "incomplete." They also argue such digital evidence should not be admissable. See alibi below.

3. Alibi/failure to prove elements of offense as alleged- In forensic evidence which the prosecution failed to disclose at the first trial, the evidence at the second trial proffered by defense forensic experts showed the computer from the instructor's lounge was connected to the internet in the Dongyang University area, during discrete periods from November 2012 to May 2013. The IP address record originally proferred by the prosecution showed the computer was in Bongbaedong in July 2012. It was again in Bongbaedong in August and September 2013, according to the state's case. In the first trial, on the second indictment, the prosecutors argued that the alleged forged certificate was produced in the Bongbaedong area, allegedly at the home of Professor Chung in June 2013. At the times of the alleged offenses (Sep 7, 2012, first indictment, not guilty, and June 16, 2013, second indictment, guilty) there are no IP address entries. After failures of proof in the courtroom, the prosecutor's requested a second indictment alleging the forged certificate for Cho Sim, originated with the later June 13, 2013, award document for her brother from the same university. At the first trial, there was no reliable indication of where the computer was at these times. Incomplete IP address entries due to prosecution alteration of the record allowed the state to argue the computer was in Bongbaedong. There is no presumption or inference available circumstantially because the integrity of the data has been tainted by prosecution mishandling, misrepresentation, and potential contamination or deletion.

Because of the haste in bringing a prosecution with no prior investigation, and the associated failure of the prosecution to allow access to the computer and the original digital data, the prosecution was free to manipulate the presentation of evidence at the first trial as it found its initial theory of the case had failed. The prosecution had seized the computer in September 2019 just a few days before, what it thought based upon its own allegations, was the expiration of the statute of limitations on the pertinent charge against Professor Chung with respect to her daughter's certificate. Yet, another pressing prosecution need was to drive Justice Minister Cho Guk out of office in attempt to block prosecutorial reform efforts by the incumbent administration. It's no surprise why exact copies of indictment documents and the chief judge's findings and orders are not published in the conservative South Korean press. Some expert observers questioned the lawfulness of allowing two trials of the same charge at the first trial. The judge ruled they weren't the same charge.

(Source- 이미지 출처, MBC 화면 캡처) [출처: 고발뉴스닷컴 12.24.2020.] http://www.gobalnews.com/news/articleView.html?idxno=31506

At the first trial, Professor Chung was found not guilty under the first indictment on the forgery charge. The court found her guilty under the second indictment, which the court ruled was a separate charge because "all the facts were different." In fact, it was a second bite at the same apple for the prosecution. Experts question the legality of the procedure. So, at least on the certificate forgery charge, the "second (appellate review) trial" is really a third trial of what is essentially the same accusation.

Initially, at the first trial, it was charged that the professor produced the forgery at the university, in Yeongju, in September 2012, with an unknown conspirator. The method of the crime was specified as arbitrary use of the presidential seal. The second indictment (12.17.19), allowed by the judge at the first trial, charged that the forgery was committed June 16, 2013, at the professor's home, in Seoul (the Bongbaedong IP address), that her co-conspirator was her daughter, and that the stamp of the former university president Choi was forged by scan reproduction. Late news on May 11, 2020, reported that the defense presented evidence, that Chung Kyung-sim, and the computer were at the Dongyang University in Yeongju at the time the prosecution alleges she produced a forgery in Seoul at Bongbae Dong. Computer files dated May 3, 20, and 27, showed class preparation on her computer for scheduled classes. At the time, she had a class schedule to meet weekly at the Dongyang campus. On August 22, 2013, a computer file, post office receipt, and a hand phone file, show Professor Chung posting registered mail near the university on August 22, 2013, when the prosecution's dubious forensic IP address record allegedly showed the computer was in Bangbae Dong according to the prosecution case. So during the blank period in IP address record, defense has raised the circumstantial implication that the professor was at the university, in Yeongju, and not in Seoul (Bangbae Dong) on the date of the alleged offense as alleged by the prosecution. Independent news commentators have reported that, thus far, the prosecution did not submit any direct or other new evidence to prove the computer was in Bongbaedong on the date alleged, June 16, 2013.

A prosecution demonstration on October 15, 2020, in the courtroom, to show how the "forged award certificate" could have been produced on Professor Chung's computer by someone with limited computer skills with just a little training failed according to the defense. Letter spacing, font size, image characteristics such as color and resolution were demonstrably different from the original. The copy produced in the courtroom by the prosecution in a 38 minute demonstration, was readily detectable as a forgery. The conservative press misrepresented the demonstration as a complete success showing that anyone could produce a forged award certificate on their computer. One of the defenses at the first trial was that the word processing program ( 아레한글 ) used to make the allegedly forged certificate was unknown to Chung who was not computer literate and only knew how to use microsoft word according to her office aid. There was no indication she had the expertise to correctly obtain, introduce, and produce, authentic looking forgeries from image files. The defense submitted several statements from technical experts at the second trial that there was no indication that Cho Min's award certificate was not authentic.

4. False reliance on the absence of regularly annotated business practice. The absence of a Dongyang Unviersity administratively assigned serial number on the actual award certificate in question is said to prove that the certificate is a forgery. Yet, a former professor from the college during the marterial period testified at trial that there was no regular business practice of assigning serial numbers to award certificates from the university and that other such certificates had been issued without direct participation of the president, and without serialized numbers from the main office, and were not fraudulent. Judge Im Jung-yeop, disallowed the testimony of this witness in the first trial and relied completely on testimony of former College President Choi Seong-hae for his finding of guilt. Choi claimed he had the exclusive power to stamp such awards. A member of his administrative office disputed this and said the power was delegated within the office and so called serial numbers were assigned by different activities. Ironically, Choi recently stated publicly, that unrecorded awards were not unusual, and that a similar problem existed at other colleges.

5. Best Evidence. The actual evidence of the alleged regular business practice of having the president's office stamp and serialize award certificates would be the award ledger itself allegedly maintained by the president's administrative office. The award ledger for the material period before, during, and after the date on the alleged forged award, relevant to the offense charged against Professor Chung doesn't exist. It was allegedly destroyed by that office. We know this because there is an audio record of Choi discussing the matter with his staff. So Choi is relying on his memory ostensibly of events that occured in 2012.

6. Prior inconsistent statements. On September 4, 2019, Choi was quoted in the press as saying the award ledger from his office still existed from 2012, and that Cho Guk's daughters name did not appear on it as someone doing volunteer work at the University's English Language Center. He also said that prosecutors had reviewed the awards records ledger from 2011 onward, an apparently false statement. Later it was reported that the award ledger record of awards was only maintained for five years and then destroyed according to University policy. This is disputed. Choi has made contradictory statements about how and when he became aware of the "forgery" both at trial and in public. He has made contradictory statements about when the policy of keeping the ledger changed, the time of destruction, who destroyed it, and how it was destroyed. The trial judge at the first trial disregarded the testimony of multiple eye witnessese that tended to support the authenticity of the certificate and relied essentially upon the "concrete and consistent testimony of former University President Choi."

7. Prosecution's chief witness under duress. The star witness against the professor in the case of the "forged award certificate" is Dangyong University's former President Choi, who allegedly mismanaged the college and placed it in financial difficulty. He had decided to open a satellite campus at a former US military facility in an attempt to expand the college. For this purpose he engaged his brother's construction company to work on the new facilities. Running short of funds he allegedly solicited faculty and staff at the college to individually contribute thousands of dollars in personal funds to the project. Reports allege he obtained many tens of thousands of dollars in this manner and transferred the funds to his brother's business. There are sources who knew Choi from the university who said he expressed concern to them about the future course the school should take on August 20, 2019. He said if he mistakenly took the side of Cho Guk, the Liberty Korea party could close the university's doors. Just before the charges were publicly disclosed against Cho Guk's wife in 2019, the college president met with representatives of the conservative opposition party, now the People's Power Party, where he allegedly discussed getting chaebol (private corporate) financial support for his failing college. In a meeting with those party members, the possibility of Choi becoming a candidate for the National Assembly himself afterwards as a proportional candidate was allegedly raised. Choi and the party representatives denied these accusations. (edit: on May 12, 2021, MBC news reported a conversation with Choi he in which admitted receiving such an offer from the Mirae Dong party but ultimately declined, and also that he had spoken with the current repesentative of the PPP before the indictment.)

Shortly thereafter, Choi was summoned by prosecutors for two interviews. Choi's nephew alleged on the record to reporters that Choi admitted he met with Prosecutor General Yoon Seok-yeol on September 8, 2021. Choi denies this and claims he met for a meal, dinner, with an assistant chief prosecutor. One independent investigative journalism program appears to have the audio recording of the conversation where Choi makes the admission. It is important to note that because of his alleged mismanagement and self dealing in financial matters there, the prosecution had leverage over Choi. So President Choi made his accusations and Professor Chung was indicted. Defense counsel regard multiple aspects of Choi's testimony as "red faced perjury." Choi himself said to a reporter he is the type of person who can't tell a lie, without revealing himself by his expression. This admission is anything but disarming. One of his tactics is saying so many inconsistent and implausible things on the same subject, that one doesn't know where to begin. When asked what he discussed with prosecutors in one early September meeting, when he was questioned for hours until late at night, Choi claimed he discussed economic conditions in the US.

None of the foregoing is discussed in the dominant South Korean conservative mainstream media (Cho-Joong-Dong media cartels) which have, in essence, taken up the role as propagandists against the Moon Jae-in administration and are complicit in the framing of democratic or progressive politicians who have attempted to reform conservative abuses in prosecution offices and the judiciary. MBC and independent investigative journalists are the sources relied on, primarily 열린공감TV,* Balgan Ajae, and Hol Seu-yong's Sisa Sageon are youtube sources relied on.** South Korea's YTN news has reported on the case controversy but took an equivocal view of evidence coming out at the second trial on appeal.


*녹취공개 예고] 최성해 전 동양대 총장, 교수들에게 돈 걷어 검찰 처벌받을까 두려워 조국 딸 표창장 증거조작 협조 정황 드러났다! - 진중권도 뜯겼다! Premiered Apr 25, 2021; 열린공감TV; https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=DKiR28ZgUDk ; This is a short video. This youtube channel has literally hours of programming on this subject. The interpretation of this video and others on this subject is my own.

**Also, see: News Freezone, "정경심 항소심서 드러난 검찰 증거 1호 PC, 허위·은폐로 얼룩져," 4.13.2021; 정현숙 기자; http://www.newsfreezone.co.kr/news/articleView.html?idxno=310144

Injunction blocks disciplinary action against South Korea's Prosecutor General

A South Korean court has created turmoil on the left by issuing a preliminary injunction against the disciplinary commmittee's judgement that Prosecutor General Yoon Seok-yeol, violated his professional duties by improperly investigating judges and failing to the maintain political independence of his office. Other specifications charging his interference in cases where he, his family or subordinates had an interest, and therefore a professional conflict of interest were not addressed by the disciplinary committee. Yoon's petition for a injunction was grounded on a contention that he could not be suspended or removed from office by this disciplinary procedure because the Prosecutor General's office was intended to be independent of outside political interference as a constitutional matter. So it appears that the Prosecutor General's office is now some kind of "fourth branch" of government in Yoon's view. Before the injunction was issued many legal scholars regarded the petition for injunction as unlikely to succeed, particularly because Yoon was only temporarily suspended from office for a short period, two months, and was not barred from reassuming his position as Prosecutor General. Some democratic representatives in the National Assembly and Justice Party representatives are now calling for Yoon's impeachment. Justice Minister Chu Mi-ae, who initiated the disciplinary proceeding, nominally Yoon's superior, is also calling for his impeachment.

Some of the ruling Democratic Party in the National Assembly (174 seats) are calling for the impeachment of Yoon Seok-yeol. Democratic Party leaders however are calling for adherence to the legislative plan to reform the criminal justice process and the offices of prosecutors and judges by implementing the Public Office Corruption Committee, and the separation of investigative and prosecution decisions in law enforcement. The fear is that judges would not confirm a bill of impeachment and that the democratic administration would end in a fiasco. The leaders also wish to stay focused on the worsening pandemic situation in South Korea.

(Image Source- 열린공감TV) Chu Mi-ae Justice Minister of South Korea (left) and Prosecutor General Yoon Seok-yeol, her insubordinate subordinate.

Chu Mi-ae, the Justice Minister. tendered an offer to resign to President Moon Jae-in when the weak two month suspension decision against Yoon for professional misconduct came down from the disciplinary committee. Clearly, the administration was anticipating a stronger disposition such as dismissal from office. The disciplinary committee's determination suggests a compromise verdict acknowledging Yoon's professional misconduct but unwilling to take on the so called "cartel of special interests" dominating the prosecutorial and judicial branches. The committee left it to the courts to take on the so called "Yoon division," within prosecution offices, along with the media and chaebol interests on the right, supporting Yoon. Consequently, Yoon has returned to work and will continue his attack on the democratic administration by implementing new politically motivated investigations and prosecutions in the hope of toppling Moon Jae-in from power, and tarnishing any significant rival potentially running against him during the next presidential election.

Yoon has stated he is not by any means inclined to resign before the last day of his term of office as Prosecutor General in July 2021. His attorneys in the pending court litigation over the substance of the diciplinary decision said they would try to have it decided on the merits within four months. The timing is interesting because newly proposed legislation creating a cooling off period for judges and prosecutors of one year before they can run for office has been introduced in the legislature. So this would mean Yoon would have to resign by April, in order to run as the conservatives candidate for president in April 2022 if the law becomes effective. Also, Yoon's office intends to continue investigate and prosecute cases in which he has a conflict of interest, such as the Optimus and Lime Fund scandals. He also stated he will prosecute a politically motivated case challenging an agency decision to close a nuclear power facility as an abuse of power within the Moon administration. Supporters of the Moon government regard the nuclear power regulatoy decision as a discretionary function with no outward signs of impropriety, being used as part of a continuing course of conduct by Yoon to topple the democratic administration and in the interim to hamper its abilities to implement criminal justice reforms.

An article in Donga Ilbo, a conservative media source, loyal to Yoon, has alluded to Yoon's apparent "appreciation" for the judicial community's "unbiased decisions" despite Yoon's earlier work removing the Chief of the Supreme Court, Yang Seung-tae, for abuse of power related to former president Park Geun-hye's impeachment scandal.* It is equally as likely that judges and justices are intimidated by Yoon who has the backing of some of the most powerful chaebol leaders in South Korea, who themselves have been protected by Yoon's office from prosecution for various illegal acts and scandals. Among these are CEOs from the leading media cartels and industry. So the observation could also be construed a veiled threat, prominently displayed before the affair is concluded.

*윤 총장은 서울중앙지검장 시절 양승태 전 대법원장 등 고위 법관들이 연루된 이른바 사법행정권 남용 의혹 수사를 직접 지휘했는데도 법원이 집행정치 사건에서 두 차례나 선입견없이 판단을 해준 것을 놓고 주변에 사법부에 대한 고마움을 표시했다고 한다. 윤석열 “내년 7월 임기때까지 물러날 생각 없어”…소송 준비 만전; https://www.donga.com/news/Society/article/all/20201227/104653420/1

The trial of former Justice Minister Cho Guk and his family in the courts by Yoon's office is one of several examples of cases initiated and manipulated for political reasons in ways that are outside the scope of normal investigative and judicial processes. For example, Cho Guk's wife was indicted shortly after he was appointed Justice Minister with a mandate to reform the prosecution of political figures and senior government officials in South Korea to eliminate documented prior prosecutorial abuses. For this political reason both he and his wife were indicted. His wife, Chung Kyung-shim, a college professor with a serious disability, was jailed pending trial for six months. She was found innocent of four charges against her in the initial indictment filed in September 2019, which was issued without a formal prior investigation. Then last December after months of litigation, when she was found not guilty, the prosecution submitted a second indictment, based upon many of the same operative material facts. The protracted "first trial" ended last week with Professor Chung Kyung-shim found guilty last week of eleven charges in the "second indictment" in a stunning reversal. The case was manipulated at the whim of the prosecution as the defense raised effective defenses as to the state's case. The only bump in the road was the release of Chung from jail pending trial after six months when the court felt pre-trial confinement could no longer be justified. She is now again in confinement after the sentence of four years announced last week. One doesn't need to speculate much on what sort of pressures Yoon's office can bring to bear on judges who don't rule in the manner desired. The principal charge in Yoon's disciplinary proceeding was based on evidence he condoned unauthorized and unwarranted investigations into the backgrounds and personal and financial circumstances of sitting South Korean judges. Observers noted a similar practice during the dictatorship period of South Korean history.

It isn't a leap to view these developments as a prelude to a dictatorial rule by Yoon Seok-yeol in the not too distant future. But for the covid pandemic and the public health restrictions on political assemblies, hundreds of thousands of democratic supporters would be in the streets every weekend demanding Yoon's impeachment. The failure, thus far, to achieve or even recognize a legal limit on Yoon's power or the systemic social and political corruption it represents bodes ill for the future of the South Korean government. It is clearly headed down an authoritarian right wing path. Nevertheless, South Korean establishment right wing media cartels insist in an Orwellian twist, that these developments represent a warranted judicial response to democratic President Moon Jae-in's "despotism."

Law in the case of Cho Guk

(Source- 아주3D Ep.23, May 12, youtube) The reporter is Jang Yom-jin


The law concerning organization of the Secretariat of the President's Office appears to allow the creation of inspection teams to review facts to support determinations on whether a matter needs to be referred for criminal investigation to prosecutors for legal process. The law is conditional on the judgement of the secretariat. Where evidence of guilt requiring compulsory legal disposition is limited the office of the Secretariat has that discretionary power. That's what the bold print cited by the reporter suggests. So it looks like Cho Guk's interpretation of the law when he was the Chief Secretary for Civil Affairs is correct. The law seems pretty straightforward as reported by Jang Yom-jin.

Only the factual issue remains whether or not the known evidence of guilt of a criminal violation by the vice mayor of Pusan, Yoo Jae-soo, was strong enough to overcome the discretion of the Presidential Secretariat and move their determination, that the case not be prosecuted, into a clear case of abuse of power. The failure of the evidence of Yoo's wrongdoing to be leaked by conservative prosecutors to the traditional conservative press after this length of time suggests that Cho Guk's decision wasn't an abuse of office. (The improper press-prosecution combination is described as 언검 유착. ) There are only summary allegations of receipt of gifts and favors, from parties with interests before Yoo's offices but no specifics thus far. This suggests the case against Cho Guk is stumbling.

It appears from this law, and the reports from the trial venue, that the pattern of unjustly framed political prosecutions by the Yoon faction is being borne out. Rather than the Blue House substituting its decision making powers for the Office of the Supreme Prosecutor, the opposite seems to be the case, where the Supreme Prosecutor's office is substituting it's judgement for the Office of the President. Now the political objective of Yoon and his former LKP, now Tong Hap Mirae Dang supporters, on the far right becomes clear. The strategy represented in a phrase previously heard on conservative broadcast media after Justice Minister Cho Guk stepped down, "we caught the fox in the house, now we must get the fox on the mountain." So the prosecution's media strategy of unlawful leaks painting Cho Guk and his family as corrupt as a prelude to removal from office and trial ultimately is part of a larger specific strategy of "impeach Moon Jae-in" evident during demonstrations at Gwanghwamun and Yoido. Those right wing "demos" were only grudgingly discontinued by the Taeguki group, religious fundamentalists and their right wing leaders, after the onset of the covid 19 pandemic. So now Yoon Seok-yeol's political prosecutions are the only political game left for the conservatives soundly defeated in last general election.

Impressions of the anti- Cho Guk demonstration

The demonstration took place on Kwanghwamoon plaza with a scheduled start of 4 pm local Seoul time. Prior to this it was kicked off by a "prayer day" rally sponsored by a Christian Conference group. There preachers spoke about President Moon Jae-in's socialism and the need to protect South Korea from the threat of pro-communist elements in the government. The conference claimed to be non-partisan. The key speaker called for the impeachment of Moon Jae-in and protested the injustice of the impeachment and imprisonment of former President Park Geun Hye. This is in contrast to an interdenominational conference of clerics which took place indoors about a week ago in support of justice reform initiatives of Moon's administration and the publication of a petition to that effect signed by 8000 clerics and monks of all denominations. The presence of American flags on the podium and in the crowd at the "non-partisan" prayer meeting also raises the traditional stereotype of foreign influences on protestant ministries dabbling in internal politics in Asia.

(Source- JTBC News, 10.3) Jeon Gwang Hoon, executive director of the United Christian Conference, calls for the impeachment of Moon Jae-In, "effective immediately." He also blasted "those expletive deleted illegally impeached Park Geun Hye and instigated the press" (against her). Minister Jeon was criticized for soliciting contributions for himself citing the biblical rewards in store for contributors, while proverbial "men in black" stood guard nearby.

Various claims were made about the size of the demonstration characterized as "people's resistance" and "people's revolution" against Moon Jae-in's democratic party government. Most of the sign's called for Cho Guk to be arrested or resign and for Moon Jae In to resign or be impeached. Estimates claimed by partisans ranged from one to three million persons. Judging from the extent and density of the crowd, it appeared more in the range of 200,000 to 300,000 people which is a surprisingly good turnout for the opposition parties. This was primarily a Liberty Korea Party affair, and their most prominent leaders were there to speak. JTBC news coverage reported that Korean police authorities no longer report on the estimated size of crowds in political demonstrations.

(Source- JTBC News, 10.3)

There were reports of violence at the demonstration. 46 persons were reported arrested for either violence or interfering with official police duties. Most of the people were arrested as they approached the Blue House perimeter, a security zone. As police attempted to ward off demonstrators, it was reported that some armed themselves with wooden clubs of some type and brandished them as weapons against police. Apparently, there is no video of this confrontation. Also a JTBC female reporter was allegedly sexually assaulted by two demonstrators according to their news report. Demonstrators also allegedly attacked one vehicle.

As a whole attempting to characterize the demonstration as a "people's revolution" seems to be patent dissembling. The Liberty Korea Party represents conservative corporate and vested money interests and Christian denomination followers in South Korea. The party is also characterized by limited regional support. The presence of American flags throughout the demonstration as a whole is something of a tell. How beneficial is it for the US to be associated with the calls for the resignation or impeachment of Moon Jae In? The ubiquitous US flag presence implies that the outside power backs our goals.

(Source- JTBC News, 10.3)

In any case the Taegukki People's Revolution Movement, a reactionary far right organization, appeared to be present at the demonstration in force, carrying US flags as well as Korean flags. Their banner (above) featured the former ruthless dictators Syngman Rhee and Park Chung Hee. It's clear where they're coming from. The presentation of potential violence against the police protecting the Blue House is an obvious threat to the administration, and smacks of the violent provocations in Hong Kong. In fact, a recent tweet, by the untethered Joshua Wong, drew a poorly formulated and unwitting link between the 5.18 massacre in Kwangju and what is going on today in Hong Kong. But back in 1980, the US backed the Chun Du Won dictatorship just as it backed the previous South Korean dictatorships. Hundreds of civilians were killed. There were no consequences for the martial law regime. The forced analogy with the South Korean democratic uprising in Kwangju suggests someone wrote Mr. Wong's media script for him. South Korean right wingers to this day claim the victims of martial law brutality and murder were communists. Today, the Liberty Korea Party, carrying American flags, calls the Korean Democratic Party communists.

Protestors gather over Cho Kuk "scandal" investigation

(Source- YTN News 9.28) Cho Kuk, South Korean Minister of Justice, "I realize deeply the saying that reform is more difficult than revolution." Minister Cho, right center carrying file.

Cho Kuk (Korean: 조국, born 6 April 1965[1]) is a South Korean jurist and politician. From 2017 to 2019, he served as the Senior Secretary to the President for Civil Affairs in the Moon Jae-in Cabinet. On 9 August 2019, President Moon Jae-in designated Cho as Minister of Justice, replacing the incumbent Park Sang-ki; he was officially appointed on 9 September.*

*https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Cho_Kuk

In what appears to be a familiar pattern in South Korean politics and society, family relations of the prominent Cho Kuk, may have used his prestige to advance their own interests. His daughter is accused of not being qualified for educational opportunities and credentials she was granted by prestigious institutions allegedly based upon influence peddling. Other family members including Cho Kuk's wife and in-laws are suspected of arranging suspicious investments in a fund used to purchase real estate and to have received funds improperly. Cho has categorically denied many of the specific allegations against his daughter and wife, and claimed lack of knowledge of alleged financial transactions said to involve his wife and in laws.

Cho was recently appointed Justice Minister by the Moon Jae In administration to clean up imbalances and improper influences on the justice system in Korea. The investigation of the alleged corruption of Cho's family has dominated the South Korean headlines for weeks as investigative leads, and search warrant particulars have been leaked to the press in an effort to derail his cabinet appointment as Justice Minister. The story has dominated South Korean media distracting from other issues, including important international issues challenging the democratic Moon administration. The extensive scope and probing nature of the ongoing investigation by the prosecutor's office along with the leaks suggests internal resistance to justice reform initiatives desired by Moon, and ostensibly to be initiated by Cho. The underlying political subtext involves the loss of power and influence by the pro-Japanese commercial and political interests traditionally supported by the right wing political opposition in South Korea attempting to recover political momentum since Moon Jae In was elected.

(Source- Daum.net News 1 9.28 구윤성 Koo Yoon Seong reporter ) Candlelight demonstration in support of Cho Kuk in front of Supreme Prosecutors Office, Seoul, South Korea.

The situation seems to have resulted in a serious backlash, as a huge candlelight demonstration took place in Seoul this morning, involving hundreds of thousands of Cho Kuk supporters and advocates for justice system reforms.*

* https://news.v.daum.net/v/20190928185345834?f=m

Some observers have claimed substantially more than a million persons may have participated. The crowd has been chanting "support Cho Kuk," and "Moon Jae In, Moon Jae In!" Signs also said "stop political prosecutors," and "investigate Liberty Korea Party." In another video of the massive demonstation, the crowd sang the patriotic national song, "holo Arirang." One poll earlier this week showed Moon's popularity rebounding to 48 percent, and democratic party support now above 40 percent, clearly a setback for conservatives. The right wing Liberty Korea Party has been calling for Cho Kuk's removal and even impeachment proceedings against Moon.