Judge in Insurrection Trial Indicted Over 4.09 Million Won Drinking Party… "Overreaching Application of Law"

〈Anchor〉

Senior Judge Ji Gwi-yeon, who is presiding over the first-trial proceedings in the case concerning the ringleader of an insurrection, has been indicted on allegations of receiving alcohol entertainment. He is accused of receiving about 4 million won worth of drinks, while Judge Ji's side expressed regret over what they called an overreaching application of the law.

Reporter Jeon Yeonnam has the details.

〈Reporter〉

In May of last year, the Democratic Party raised suspicions that Senior Judge Ji Gwi-yeon, who presides over the first trial for the insurrection ringleader, received entertainment at a room salon.

[Kim Yong-min / Democratic Party of Korea lawmaker (May of last year): He drank multiple times at a room salon where costs amount to 1 to 2 million won per person, and that judge never paid a single time.]

Civic groups and others filed complaints with the Corruption Investigation Office for High-Ranking Officials (CIO), and the CIO indicted Judge Ji without detention on charges of violating the Improper Solicitation and Graft Act 1 year and 4 months after launching its investigation.

Judge Ji is accused of having two lawyers pay a 4.09 million won bar bill at a pub in Cheongdam-dong, Seoul, in August 2023.

Under the Improper Solicitation and Graft Act, if a public official receives money, valuables, or entertainment exceeding 1 million won at one time from the same person, they are subject to criminal punishment even if there is no connection to their official duties. According to the CIO's investigation results, dividing the total amount among three people exceeds 1 million won.

During the questioning, Judge Ji denied the charges with the stance that he "does not seem to have been drinking at the pub for a long time." However, the CIO stated that after examining taxi boarding records and movements, it was determined that Judge Ji stayed at the pub for about 4 to 5 hours.

However, the CIO did not apply bribery charges, judging that there was no quid pro quo because Judge Ji did not handle cases involving the lawyers who provided the entertainment at the time.

In response, Judge Ji's side stated, "We express regret over the CIO's overreaching application of the law," and claimed, "He attended a gathering with junior colleagues and left the seat right away, and since the two lawyers paid the expenses separately at different times, they cannot be regarded as the same person."

(Video Editing: Kim Jin-won)
※ Please note: This article was translated by AI and may contain errors.