Pres. Lee`s brother gets prison time for bribery conviction

The older brother of President Lee Myung-bak was sentenced to two years in prison Thursday for taking bribes from savings banks that were struggling to stay afloat.

The Seoul Central District Court handed down the sentence to Lee Sang-deuk, 78, a former ruling Saenuri Party lawmaker, and also fined him 757.5 million won (709,000 U.S. dollars).

Saenuri Rep. Jeong Du-eon, 56, a co-defendant in the case, was sentenced to one year in prison and a fine of 140 million won (131,150 dollars). Because the National Assembly was not in session, he was immediately sent to a detention center without parliamentary consent. After the ruling was announced, Lee Sang-deuk left the court room in tears. Jeong also looked flustered, as if he did not expect a prison term.

The court found both defendants guilty of accepting money and goods from savings banks, agreeing with most of the charges leveled against them by prosecutors.

“Defendants Lee Sang-deuk and Jeong Do-eon received 600 million won (562,000 dollars) and 140 million won (131,150 dollars) in illegal political funds, respectively, from Solomon Savings Bank CEO Yim Seok and Mirae Savings Bank CEO Kim Chan-gyeong,” the ruling said. “The statements of Yim and Kim were consistent and detailed, and we compared and reviewed related objective evidence and testimony from related people.”

Lee Sang-deuk was also found guilty of accepting 157.5 million won (147,500 dollars) in office expenses from Kolon, and both he and Jeong were convicted of colluding and receiving 300 million won (281,000 dollars) from Kim.

“The crime of the defendants was an act that disdained the people’s expectation for democratic development and aggravated distrust in politics,” the court said. “This shall be strictly punished since taking illegal political funds from businessmen will cause the people to bear the burden for lack of transparency in business management.”

The two men, however, were found not guilty on the charge of accepting bribes in return for favors. “The crime of taking bribes in return for favors cannot be constituted simply because a bribe-giver gave bribes with vague expectation of a favor. No evidence proved that the CEOs’ intended favors materialized,” the ruling said.

coolup@donga.com