[ad_1]
The prosecution said at the first trial of Cho Bum-dong, the fifth niece of former Justice Minister Cho Kook, “It was difficult for us to believe the private equity crime of Professor Kyung-Shim Chung, the highest authority.” Furthermore, she strongly criticized the first trial ruling that did not admit the collusion between Mr. Cho and Professor Jeong as “opening the highway of corruption”.
On the 9th, the prosecution revealed the reason for the appeal against Cho in the first trial of the appeal against Cho, held at the section 11 hearing of the Seoul High Court. Mr. Cho was sentenced to four years in prison in the first trial for embezzling money and violating the Capital Market Law through false disclosure.
The reason for the prosecution’s appeal that day was read by Kang Baek-shin, the head of the Tongyeong branch. He was appointed to the Tongyeong branch by a mid-level executive in August, and travels between Seoul and Tongyeong every week, making a 10-hour round trip for former Minister Cho Kuk’s family trial.
The prosecution charged Cho with conspiring with Professor Jeong to falsely report fund investments to the Financial Services Commission and receive interest on investments by signing a bogus consulting contract, embezzlement from Korink PE, and destruction related tests. However, the first trial was acquitted of all charges except destruction of evidence. Regarding the false report, Mr. Cho was not guilty, so of course he thought that there was no accomplice with Professor Jeong. The embezzlement charges were not admitted, saying: “It seems that I would not have had a special sense of trouble receiving interest.
The prosecution said: “The trial for the first trial undermined the constitutional value.” “The application of criminal law should not be a negative situation that depends on the condition or condition of the accused,” he criticized, saying that the relevant laws and regulations were applied in favor of Professor Jeong.
In response to the acquittal of the first trial for embezzlement, he said: “We recognized the validity of the legal act based on the internal intentions of the parties.” In this case, even the chaebol family, etc. Open it.”
Mindful of the criticisms of the ‘objective investigation’ raised in the investigation of former Minister Cho, the prosecution also explained in detail the trigger and the process of the investigation. The prosecution said: “It was hard to believe that Jung Gyeong-shim, the spouse of the former head Min Jeong-shim of our society, had been involved in crimes such as embezzlement. Although the objective evidence was confirmed, I continued to search for the motive. “He said,” As a result, in order to achieve the motive of transmitting wealth to the children, he abused the authority of former senior public officials, actively participating in or tolerating criminal activities. “
In response, the lawyer appealed to the first trial to review the convicted party again. As in the first trial, the lawyer argued that “the actual controlling owner of Korink PE is President Ik-seong Lee Bong-jik, and the defendant (Cho Beom-dong) was only used.”
