Concluded As `Personal Corruption` of $2,000 Bribe

The result of the midway investigation of the prosecution, which was announced yesterday when the Prosecution indicted three people, including Kook Joong-Ho, a former Cheong Wa Dae official, Lee Sang-Ho, a former head of the Incheon International Airport Corp. (IIAC), was evaluated as too insufficient to release the suspicion of `external pressure` and `lobby` over the issue of selection of the civilian business bidder for the idle land at the Incheon International Airport.

The incident started when Airport 72 Consortium and the representative Yoon Heong-Ryul of the Sports Seoul 21, which were eliminated from the selection of the business bidder, filed a lawsuit against Lee, a former head of the IIAC, for libel. However, without much progress, the investigation on the incident was in fact concluded after 20 day investigation.

The prosecution concluded the incident as `personal corruption` not as `power-involved external pressure`. Kwon Tae-Ho, first deputy prosecutor general of the Incheon Prosecutors Office, `self-praised` saying that ``the investigation demonstrated a strong will of exposure of misguided lobby culture.``

Suspicion was raised from the beginning as to whether the prosecution could reveal the whole story since the complainant is the brother-in-law of the eldest son of President and the company in which the complainant is the head was involved.

- Was there no external pressure? The core of the incident is whether `external pressure` is involved. The prosecution concluded that Kook, a former Cheong Wa Dae official, called Lee, a former head of the IIAC, and `exercised power` after having been asked to `make Airport 72 to be selected` by Yang (44), manager of the Ace membership exchange, and this is the all of the `external pressure`.

However, it is doubtful as to whether Kook, a former 3 level official, could exercise personal level of pressure over the issue of `national` construction business. In relation to this, analysts say that if the prosecution have avoided `hot potato` by focusing on the investigation of `related companies` lobby and bribes`.

There is something inexplicable in the matter that even when the prosecution secured the contents of the telephonic communication of not only Kook, but also another Cheong Wa Dae official and Kang Dong-Seok president of the Airport, the prosecution evaded the point by saying that `they were usual telephonic communications`. The prosecution almost consistently did not respond to the reports` questions.

- True nature of lobby: The prosecution announced that the `whole story of lobby` was Yang`s $2,000 (approximately 2.63 million won) bribe to Kook. Sports Seoul 21, the largest shareholder of the Airport 72, was excluded from the investigation on suspicion of lobby. The prosecution is keeping silence as to which companies, as main axes, form the consortium, and as to the matter of lobby.

The prosecution did not offer a reasonable explanation as to why president Kang tried so hard to take the Airport 72 under his wings. Moreover, the prosecution could not find out why Lee, a former head of the IIAC, changed the evaluation items and attached to select Wonik Corp., which wrote the small land use fee. In relation to the suspicion on the reversed preference questioned to Lee, the prosecution investigated related companies over the issue of lobby, but could not find any proof of lobby.

Park Joung-Gu jangkung@donga.com