Police Dismiss First-Ever 'Judicial Distortion' Complaint Against Chief Justice Cho Hee-dae

The police have dismissed the first-ever complaint filed under the so-called 'judicial distortion' law, which targeted Supreme Court Chief Justice Cho Hee-dae.

The Anti-Corruption Investigation Unit of the Seoul Metropolitan Police Agency announced on July 2 that it had dismissed the allegations of judicial distortion against Chief Justice Cho and Supreme Court Justice Park Young-jae, deciding not to forward the case to the prosecution.

Previously, lawyer Lee Byung-chul had filed a complaint alleging that Chief Justice Cho and others failed to properly deliberate on the Public Official Election Act violation case involving Lee Jae-myung, then a presidential candidate for the Democratic Party of Korea, just before last year's presidential election.

The complaint argued that despite the obligation to thoroughly review case records spanning over 70,000 pages, the defendants referred the case to the full bench on April 22 of last year—the same day it was assigned—and concluded deliberations in just two days, resulting in a guilty verdict, which the complainant characterized as judicial distortion.

However, the police determined that the case did not fall under the scope of the judicial distortion law.

The police reasoned that the judicial distortion law, which took effect on March 12, cannot be applied to the remand judgment issued on May 1 of last year, as the act occurred before the law was enacted.

Explaining the reason for not forwarding the case, the police stated, "The judgment by the suspects was definitively expressed externally at the time of the sentencing in May of last year. Since there is no procedural authority or obligation for a judge to further review case records after sentencing, it is difficult to view the so-called state of omission—where one fails to perform their duties—as continuing after the sentencing."

Regarding the charge of dereliction of duty, which was requested as an alternative charge, the police concluded, "The case proceeded through the assignment of a presiding justice, referral to the full bench, and the holding of deliberation dates before reaching the final judgment," adding, "It is not recognized as a dereliction of duty."

In response, the complainant side argued, "This decision intentionally ignores the fact that the case is still under deliberation at the Supreme Court, where the defendants belong."

They further stated, "We will supplement the evidence and file a separate complaint with the Corruption Investigation Office for High-ranking Officials."

Reported by Kim Jiuk | Video by Kim Hye-ju | Graphics by Lee Su-min | Produced by SBS Digital News
※ Please note: This article was translated by AI and may contain errors.