The special counsel team led by Min Joong-ki has submitted an opinion to the Supreme Court, which is pending a final ruling on Kim Keon-hee, stating that "a consensus was reached between former President Yoon Suk-yeol, Kim Keon-hee, and Myung Tae-kyun regarding the provision of public opinion polls."

The opinion, which analyzes and submits the first-instance guilty verdict against former President Yoon regarding the allegations of receiving opinion polls from Myung Tae-kyun, argues that Kim, as an accomplice, should also be found guilty, contrary to the not-guilty rulings in the first and second trials.

The special counsel team submitted the 48-page opinion to the Supreme Court's Second Division (presided over by Justice Park Young-jae), which is hearing Kim's case, yesterday (July 20).

The special counsel team countered the reasons for the not-guilty verdict in Kim's second trial one by one with the reasons for the guilty verdict in former President Yoon's first trial, emphasizing that "the reasons for the guilty verdict are valid."

The special counsel team argued, "The lower court (second trial) evaluated the text messages between the former President and his wife and Myung Tae-kyun by separating them by date, thereby minimizing their implications," adding, "When interpreting the entire content of the messages organically, one cannot help but conclude that there was a consensus between the former President and his wife and Myung Tae-kyun regarding the conduct and provision of opinion polls."

The first-instance court in former President Yoon's case acknowledged, based on text messages exchanged between Kim and Myung, that there was a sequential and implicit consensus between the former President and his wife and Myung regarding the free provision of opinion polls.

The special counsel team specifically cited the content of conversations between the two when the publication of opinion polls through Money Today was on the verge of being suspended, which suggested that they should find another media outlet to continue the polls.

The special counsel team further emphasized, "As appropriately ruled in the guilty verdict of Yoon Suk-yeol, the fact that the sampling method for public opinion polls was adjusted and the sample sizes and result figures for non-public polls were artificially Distorted to be favorable to Yoon Suk-yeol implies that the polls were conducted based on consultations with the Defendant couple."

Furthermore, the team added, "Even if there were circumstances where the regular presidential election polls with Money Today were scheduled before Myung Tae-kyun met the Defendant (Kim Keon-hee), or that Myung Tae-kyun arranged a meeting between Yoon Suk-yeol and Kim Chong-in, this does not hinder the fact that there was a consensus between the Defendant couple and Myung Tae-kyun regarding the conduct and provision of opinion polls."

Pointing out that the opinion polls were provided to the former President and his wife dozens of times, the team noted that it is difficult to view this solely as Myung's promotional or business purpose, and that the fact that the poll results were also provided to a third party does not negate the fact that there was a consultation between the Defendants.

This is a rebuttal to the explanation provided by the second-instance court in Kim's case, using the grounds cited by the first-instance court in former President Yoon's case.

The special counsel team argued, "Even if Kim is not considered a person engaged in political activities, given the role she played and the fact that she and Yoon Suk-yeol were in a political community relationship, she can sufficiently be recognized as a joint principal offender."

The final ruling on Kim's case was originally scheduled for the 16th, but it was postponed to the 24th after the special counsel team's request for a delay was accepted.

The special counsel team requested the postponement, asking the court to review the first-instance verdict of the Seoul Central District Court, which found former President Yoon, an accomplice in Kim's alleged receipt of opinion polls, guilty.

In response, Kim's side also submitted an 18-page opinion to the Supreme Court on the 16th, arguing that "the impact of the first-instance verdict in former President Yoon's case on the Supreme Court's ruling in Kim's case is limited and is not a variable that would sway the judgment of the higher court."