Diverging Verdicts in 'Poll-Paid-by-Proxy' Cases: Why Did Yoon, Kim Keon-hee, and Oh Se-hoon Face Different Outcomes? (Full Video)

[Anchor]

Seoul Mayor Oh Se-hoon, who was indicted on charges of receiving public opinion polls from political broker Myung Tae-kyun and having a supporter cover the costs, has been sentenced to a fine of 10 million won in his first trial. If this ruling is finalized, Mayor Oh will lose his position. The court pointed out that Mayor Oh, having served as a lawmaker and mayor, "was well aware of the Political Funds Act yet failed to take responsibility during the trial." Mayor Oh stated that the ruling is unacceptable and that he will appeal.

Our first report comes from reporter Shin Yong-il.

[Reporter Shin Yong-il]

[Verdict: Defendant Oh Se-hoon is fined 10 million won.]

Seoul Mayor Oh Se-hoon, put on trial for violating the Political Funds Act, has been found guilty.

The court sentenced Mayor Oh to a fine of 10 million won along with an additional collection of 21 million won.

Under the Public Official Election Act, if a fine of 1 million won or more is finalized, Mayor Oh will lose his mayoral post.

Previously, the special counsel team investigating Kim Keon-hee demanded a one-and-a-half-year prison sentence for Mayor Oh, stating that ahead of the April 7 Seoul mayoral by-election in 2021, Mayor Oh commissioned Myung Tae-kyun to conduct 10 public opinion polls and had businessman and supporter Kim Han-jung pay 33 million won for the costs on his behalf.

In response, the first-instance court concluded that 5 of these polls were commissioned by Mayor Oh, and that the 21 million won polling cost was paid by Kim, constituting an illegal political fund donation.

The decision was based on factors such as the matching timelines of the polls and the deposit dates.

The court further pointed out that Mayor Oh has consistently evaded responsibility.

[Cho Hyung-woo, Presiding Judge, Criminal Settlement Division 22, Seoul Central District Court: Having served as a member of the National Assembly and the Mayor of Seoul, he was well aware of the legislative intent and content of the Political Funds Act, yet he maintained an attitude of failing to properly acknowledge his responsibility.]

Immediately after the sentencing, Mayor Oh wore a heavy expression and stared fixedly toward the bench for a while, stating that he could not accept the verdict and would appeal.

[Oh Se-hoon, Mayor of Seoul: Based solely on the statements of that supreme liar Myung Tae-kyun and indirect evidence, with absolutely no direct evidence, relying on deductions.]

Meanwhile, the special counsel team stated that it was a very meaningful ruling and that they would decide whether to appeal after analyzing the judgment text.

(Camera Reporter: Yang Hyun-chul | Video Editor: Wee Won-yang | Designer: Lee Ga-jin)

---

[Anchor]

Seoul Mayor Oh Se-hoon has maintained throughout the investigation and trial period that the special counsel conducted a 'political investigation' without any direct evidence. However, the court today ruled that sufficient circumstances are recognized showing that Mayor Oh commissioned the polls and had the costs covered by proxy.

Reporter Jang Hoon-gyung covers the reasons behind the court's decision.

[Reporter Jang Hoon-gyung]

Seoul Mayor Oh Se-hoon had emphasized throughout the investigation and trial that he had never commissioned Myung Tae-kyun to conduct public opinion polls or had anyone else cover the costs.

[Oh Se-hoon, Mayor of Seoul (March): These people are a fraudulent criminal organization. Myung Tae-kyun is a recruiter or operative scouting targets for fraud....]

However, the court judged that Mayor Oh, who was facing an intra-party primary at the time, had sufficient motive to commission Myung to conduct public opinion polls.

The court noted that poll results showing rival candidate Na Kyung-won ahead were being released, and since the main primary was set to allocate a gender bonus, Mayor Oh had an incentive to use general public approval ratings as his strength.

[Cho Hyung-woo, Presiding Judge, Criminal Settlement Division 22, Seoul Central District Court: His political standing had somewhat contracted. Because it was decided that the main primary would proceed entirely based on a general public opinion poll, he would have felt a strong necessity for polls intended for public release as well.]

The court also cited as grounds for a guilty verdict the facts that Mayor Oh first contacted Myung to receive explanations on election strategies; that Myung, who had been unable to conduct polls for a month due to cost issues, carried out a poll two days after meeting Mayor Oh; and that supporter Kim Han-jung transferred a large sum of money despite having almost no personal acquaintance with Myung.

[Cho Hyung-woo, Presiding Judge, Criminal Settlement Division 22, Seoul Central District Court: Regarding the (five) polls as well, the facts of commissioning and proxy payment are recognized.]

The court also noted that when unfavorable poll results emerged, Mayor Oh's side and Myung engaged in fierce disputes, though it concluded that the other five polls could not be definitively deemed as commissioned by Mayor Oh.

At the same time, the court pointed out that Mayor Oh's culpability is severe, noting that he "covertly concealed the act of commissioning polls and the cost payment process."

[Cho Hyung-woo, Presiding Judge, Criminal Settlement Division 22, Seoul Central District Court: For the defendant, the imposition of a sentence depriving him of public office qualifications corresponding to his criminal responsibility is inevitable.]

The court stated, however, that it reflected in the sentencing the facts that the crime took place during an intra-party primary for Seoul mayoral candidates and that Mayor Oh did not continue his relationship with Myung afterward.

(Video Editor: Kim Jong-tae)

---

[Anchor]

Legal affairs specialist reporter Im Chan-jong is here with us.

Q. Why are the rulings for the 'Myung Tae-kyun scandal' involving Oh Se-hoon, Kim Keon-hee, and Yoon Suk Yeol different?

[Im Chan-jong, Legal Affairs Specialist Reporter: The most crucial reason is that the judgments on who commissioned the public opinion polls differed. For a politician receiving free public opinion polls to constitute a violation of the Political Funds Act, it must be proven that the provided polls were commissioned by that specific politician. This is because if polls were provided that were never desired, the recipient politician cannot be deemed to have obtained property benefits. In this regard, the first trial of Seoul Mayor Oh's case concluded that Mayor Oh commissioned Myung Tae-kyun to conduct polls five times, leading to a guilty verdict today. Conversely, in the first and second trials of Kim Keon-hee's case, it was judged that Kim and former President Yoon did not commission the polls, resulting in an acquittal. Meanwhile, in a separately conducted first-instance trial regarding former President Yoon, a guilty verdict was handed down based on the determination that there was a 'meeting of minds' regarding the polls between Myung and former President Yoon's side.]

Q. The Supreme Court ruling on Kim Keon-hee is set for the day after tomorrow. How will it impact the trials of Oh Se-hoon and Yoon Suk Yeol?

[Im Chan-jong, Legal Affairs Specialist Reporter: The Supreme Court ruling on Kim Keon-hee scheduled for the day after tomorrow will have a direct impact on former President Yoon Suk Yeol's trial. This is because, although their trials have proceeded separately, they are essentially the same case as Kim and former President Yoon were indicted as accomplices. The problem is that the first and second-instance rulings for Kim Keon-hee and the first-instance ruling for former President Yoon Suk Yeol contradict each other. Ultimately, the Supreme Court ruling on Kim Keon-hee coming out the day after tomorrow is expected to resolve this contradiction by serving as a standard applied to former President Yoon's second-instance trial. On the other hand, while Mayor Oh Se-hoon's case shares the similarity with the couple's case in that polls were provided by Myung Tae-kyun, it is a separate case with different specific factual relations. Therefore, the Supreme Court ruling on Kim Keon-hee is not expected to apply directly as a standard in this case.]

Q. When will the final verdict for the 'Oh Se-hoon case' be finalized?

[Im Chan-jong, Legal Affairs Specialist Reporter: Under the Special Counsel Act, the second-instance trial must conclude within three months, and the Supreme Court must also finish its trial within three months. Therefore, the second trial must wrap up within October of this year. If the second trial fully utilizes the three-month period, the Supreme Court must issue its ruling within January of next year. However, if the Supreme Court overturns the appellate ruling, a remand trial will proceed anew, meaning the final confirmation of the verdict could be delayed further.]

(Video Editor: Wee Won-yang)
※ Please note: This article was translated by AI and may contain errors.