Former NIS Chief Cho Tae-yong Sentenced to 2.5 Years in Prison in Appeal Trial Over Political Involvement, Heavier Than 1st Trial

Former National Intelligence Service (NIS) Director Cho Tae-yong, who was indicted for charges including political involvement by spreading false facts following the December 3 internal insurrection, has received a heavier sentence in his appellate trial than in the first trial.

Unlike the first trial, the appellate court partially recognized the core charge of violating the National Intelligence Service Act as guilty.

The 1st Criminal Division of the Seoul High Court (Presiding Judge Yoon Sung-sik) sentenced former Director Cho, who was indicted and detained on charges including dereliction of duty and violation of the National Intelligence Service Act, to two years and six months in prison and two years and six months of suspension of qualifications on the 19th.

The sentencing demand by the special counsel team for the insurrection, led by Cho Eun-seok, was seven years in prison.

The first trial had sentenced him to one year and six months in prison.

The appellate court found that former Director Cho violated the prohibition on political involvement under the NIS Act by holding a press conference between December 6 and 10, 2024—following the emergency martial law—stating that "the president never gave orders to arrest politicians," and by sending text messages to NIS and Ministry of Foreign Affairs officials claiming that "the claims of former 1st Deputy Director Hong Jang-won are not true."

The court determined that former Director Cho distributed the press conference statements and text messages while recognizing they were false in order to undermine the credibility of former Deputy Director Hong's statements.

Given that former Deputy Director Hong's statements served as a core basis for the argument that former President Yoon should be impeached, the court noted that former Director Cho ultimately had a political motive and purpose to obstruct the impeachment.

The court also pointed out, "The NIS director resorted to unusual methods such as calling for a press conference to distribute false information without explaining any convincing circumstances."

However, the appellate court upheld the first trial's not-guilty verdict regarding the charge of violating the NIS Act by providing CCTV footage from the NIS containing former Deputy Director Hong's movements exclusively to the People Power Party while withholding footage of his own movements from the Democratic Party of Korea.

The court noted that former Director Cho merely complied with a legitimate request for data submission by the National Assembly at the time, and there was no evidence to suggest he discussed the submission of the footage with the People Power Party in advance.

Therefore, it ruled that submitting the CCTV footage could not be regarded as an act of engaging in political activities.

The appellate court also maintained the first trial's not-guilty verdict on another major charge applied to former Director Cho: dereliction of duty.

This charge involved allegations that although former Director Cho received reports from former NIS 1st Deputy Director Hong Jang-won during the emergency martial law that former President Yoon Suk Yeol and others mobilized the military to blockade the National Assembly and arbitrarily arrest politicians, he failed to report this to the National Assembly.

The appeals court noted that upon receiving such reports from former Deputy Director Hong, former Director Cho recognized that the entity attempting to arrest politicians was the Armed Forces Counterintelligence Command.

However, it judged that merely hearing this information was not enough to conclude that an obligation to report to the National Assembly had arisen.

The court explained, "In addition to the contents of former Deputy Director Hong's report, there was a need to verify additional information regarding the specific reasons and methods for the arrests," adding, "The crime of dereliction of duty premised on a reporting obligation cannot be established."

The first trial had found him not guilty of this charge on the grounds that it could not be concluded that former Director Cho had received a report from former Deputy Director Hong to the effect that the Counterintelligence Command was the entity carrying out the arrest of politicians.

The difference in judgment between the first and second trials regarding former Deputy Director Hong's report also affected rulings on other charges.

Unlike the first trial, the appellate court found former Director Cho guilty of perjury (violation of the Act on Testimony and Appraisal before the National Assembly) for falsely testifying during a National Assembly parliamentary investigation special committee into the insurrection suspicions in January of last year that he "had never received a report from former Deputy Director Hong regarding orders to arrest politicians."

Similarly, the court overturned the first trial's not-guilty verdict and found him guilty of perjury at the Constitutional Court in February of last year.

In addition, the appellate court found former Director Cho guilty of several other charges that the first trial had dismissed: involvement in deleting secure phone (bihwaphone) information between former President Yoon and former Deputy Director Hong containing conversations related to the arrest of politicians (destruction of evidence); denying knowledge of former President Yoon mentioning "extraordinary measures" during a gathering at a safehouse in Samcheong-dong between March and April 2024 when questioned at the Constitutional Court; and denying that he saw martial law declaration documents at the presidential office on the day martial law was declared or witnessed former Defense Minister Kim Yong-hyun handing them over to other cabinet members (respective perjury charges) — all of which were recognized as guilty, differing from the first trial.

Conversely, the charges of denying that he received martial law-related instruction documents from the president or defense minister during testimony at the Constitutional Court and in written answers sent to the National Assembly (violation of the Act on Testimony and Appraisal before the National Assembly and perjury) were overturned from the first trial's guilty verdict and ruled not guilty.

This portion of the indictment accused former Director Cho of denying that he received martial law-related "instruction documents," and the first trial is viewed as having misinterpreted this as "general martial law-related documents."

Regarding sentencing, the court reprimanded him, stating, "Despite receiving a report regarding the 'arrest orders' on the day of the emergency martial law, the defendant directly participated in political disputes by externally conveying false facts claiming no such thing occurred."

It also pointed out, "The act of a high-ranking public official destroying evidence by using his position and authority significantly undermines the investigative agencies' and courts' function of discovering substantive truth, and thus his responsibility is not light."

Furthermore, the court rebuked him, noting, "It cannot be regarded as light at all, given that it created the risk of obstructing the substantive truth related to the criminal trials and impeachment adjudication concerning Yoon Suk Yeol, which have drawn intense national attention."

(Photo: Yonhap News)
※ Please note: This article was translated by AI and may contain errors.