Lawyer Kim Under Pressure to Reveal the Name of Corrupt Prosecutors

The People’s Solidarity for Participatory Democracy (PSPD) and Lawyers for a Democratic Society (Minbyun) filed a complaint with the prosecution against Samsung for its illegal lobbying activities yesterday.

However, the prosecutors’ office said that the investigation won’t start until the names of figures who received bribes from Samsung are revealed.

In the complaint, the two civic groups said that Samsung Chairman Lee Kun-hee used illegal methods in granting his group’s management rights to his son, Lee Jae-yong; that Samsung fabricated evidence related to the Everland case; that Samsung opened illegal bank accounts and raised slush fund; and that it was involved in illegal lobbying activities.

In fact, most of this accusation is based on arguments that the Catholic Priests’ Association for Justice (CPAJ) and lawyer Kim made through press conferences or interviews with newspapers.

The news that was first revealed through this complaint was that Heo Tae-hak (the former president of Everland) and Park No-bin (the current president of Everland), who were both found guilty for illegally selling Everland convertible bonds (CB) to Chairman Lee’s son and daughters at an extremely low prices, didn’t know about the sales, and that Kim, who was pointed out as one of the people who called Chairman Lee’s son and asked whether he wanted to buy the CB by the prosecution, didn’t have a powerful enough position to directly contact Lee’s son.

Regarding this, a source from the investigation team on the case said that, “We are still investigating the case and targeting a third figure in addition to Heo and Park. I don’t know why they are so anxious about this,” adding, “Besides, Kim is not that important a figure in this case.”

The prosecutors’ office is now pushing lawyer Kim to reveal the list of figures who received bribes from Samsung. It argued that the complaint that was made on the basis of Kim’s statement lacks preciseness, so that it is not enough to get a motion for investigation.

In addition, some point out that without knowing who received bribes, if an investigation team is formed, the investigation could be crippled if one of team members is found to have been involved in the bribery scandal.

Kim Gyeong-su, director of public relations at the Supreme Public Prosecutors’ Office, said that, “I think that if we have to reorganize the investigation team for a problem like this, the fairness of the investigation will be questioned by the public.”

A high-ranking officer from the prosecution said, “If we don’t have the list, after asking all of prosecutors here whether or not they received bribes, we have to start an investigation.”

Even though lawyer Kim claims that he handed bribes ranging from 5 million won to tens of millions of won to high-ranking prosecutors, some people in the judicial circle doubt that the list really exists.

One legal expert said that, “If Kim reveals the names of those who received bribes without concrete evidence, it will trigger a controversy in judicial circles.”

will71@donga.com