hankyoreh

Still from footage taken of Kim Keon-hee, the wife of President Yoon Suk-yeol, receiving a luxury bag from a Korean American pastor named Choi Jae-young on Sept. 13, 2022. (still from Voice of Seoul video)

The Anti-Corruption and Civil Rights Commission (ACRC) closed on Monday its case regarding allegations that first lady Kim Keon-hee violated anti-graft laws by accepting a luxury handbag from a Korean American pastor. It was revealed two days later that the commission’s chairperson and three vice chairpersons known to be close allies of President Yoon Suk-yeol determined that there were “no grounds for punishment” and were behind the push to wrap up the investigation. Other members of the commission called the move to wrap up the investigation an “international embarrassment.”  

The complaint submitted to the ACRC named three people as subject to investigation: President Yoon Suk-yeol, first lady Kim Keon-hee, and Choi Jae-young, the pastor who gifted a luxury handbag to Kim, secretly filmed the interaction, and later testified against Kim and the president. Allegedly, ACRC Chairperson Ryu Chul-whan and three vice chairpersons — Chung Seung-yun, Kim Tae-gyu and Park Jong-min — declared on Monday that “the Improper Solicitation and Graft Act contains no clauses pertaining to punishing the spouse of a public official,” and made a strong push for the case to be closed. Documents submitted by the ACRC to its general committee seem to push for the same conclusion. 

“Accepting the accusations against the first lady are akin to approving Choi’s actions in secretly filming the interaction after baiting the first lady into a trap,” Ryu and his vice chairs reportedly said.

“We cannot investigate the president due to executive privilege,” they were reported to have said.

From beginning to end, the ACRC’s top brass appear to have rushed to shield the president and the first lady from prosecution. When an ACRC committee member referred to Kim’s acceptance of the bag as a “bribe,” one of the vice chairs reportedly got visibly angry and demanded that he “refrain from using that word.”

Among the ACRC plenary committee’s 15 members, 13 of them were appointed during Yoon’s presidency. Ryu was a classmate of Yoon’s during his law school days. Park Jong-min also attended the same law school as an underclassman. Chung is a former prosecutor who served as part of Yoon’s presidential campaign and his presidential transition committee. Kim Tae-gyu is a former judge who attended a campaign rally in support of Yoon ahead of the presidential election. 

Committee members who opposed the decision questioned the statement that the Improper Solicitation and Graft Act does not apply to the spouses of public officials. They also called for additional investigations into the first lady regarding allegations that she directly exploited her personal connection to the president in the pursuit of a bribe. 

“If we conclude the case without an investigation, what is the point of the ACRC?” they protested. 

Even members appointed during Yoon’s presidency spoke up. “Are we to simply ignore cases like this going forward? If so, shouldn’t we present the case to another agency to take up the investigation?” they asked. 

The same members questioned the legitimacy of the reference documents they received from the ACRC brass. 

“They only contained the original accusations put forth by the People’s Solidarity for Participatory Democracy, articles published in the press, and the arguments for closing the case. There were no documents pertaining to any actual investigation,” they added. 

They also questioned the luxury handbag being referred to as “part of official presidential records.” 

“A present publicly given to the president during state visits is completely different from a luxury handbag,” they pointed out. 

Regarding these protests, the ACRC apparently offered no comment. 

When the debate showed no signs of being settled, one committee member suggested an anonymous vote. This would solve the issue of members appointed by the Yoon administration worrying about angering their benefactors. The ACRC rejected this proposal, however, citing the “lack of precedence.” 

The vote was ultimately held by members giving a show of hands. Eight voted to close the cases on Yoon and Choi. Seven voted to hand their investigations off to another agency. Nine voted to close the case on the first lady. Three voted to refer the details of the investigation to another agency. Three voted to relegate the investigation to another agency. Thus, the cases were closed. 

However, it was clear that even members appointed by the Yoon administration found the results questionable. Cases are referred to another agency when members deem a suspect should face criminal charges. Simply transmitting the case to another agency refers to when members are unsure as to whether charges should officially be pressed.

By Son Hyun-soo, staff reporter

Please direct questions or comments to [english@hani.co.kr]