Im Seong-geun, who is on trial for the same case, can the prosecution? “The same as when Park Geun-hye was”

The indictment against the Chief Judge of the Busan High Court Im Seong-geun passed the plenary session of the National Assembly on the 4th. Photo shows Judge Im Seong-geun at that time, at that time, meeting with the guards from the prison at the Seoul Detention Center. Newsis

The Constitutional Court has started a hearing against the head of the Busan High Court, Im Seong-geun, who was charged with alleged abuse of the judicial administration. In the judge’s first impeachment trial, experts predicted that it was not easy to make an impeachment decision, but it was highly likely that they would give an opinion on whether the constitution was unconstitutional.

According to the legal community on the 6th, the entire Constitutional Court is deliberating after assigning a case number (2021 Heonna1) to the accusation of impeachment against Judge Lim presented by the National Assembly. The arbitrator is Judge Lee Seok-tae, who served as president of the bar association for democratic society and co-representative of solidarity participation.

Judge Lim is currently on trial for the same reasons as in the indictment. He is alleged to have intervened in the court case of the former head of the Sankei Shimbun Seoul Bureau, who was charged with defamation against then-President Park Geun-hye in 2015, and professional baseball players Lim Chang-yong and Oh Seung’s Won- hwan. Jeong-bak case. Judge Lim was acquitted in the first trial and an appeal trial is ongoing.

For this reason, some have questioned whether it is correct to file impeachment before the results of the trial are known. Regarding this, Dr. Seung Jae-Hyun from the Korea Criminal Policy Research Institute explained, “Prosecution and impeachment can be carried out at the same time because the purpose is different, as seen in the case. from former President Park Geun-hye “. This is because the trial is a punishment procedure and the constitution decides whether to dismiss the actions of the vice-presiding judge in violation of the constitution. Former President Park was indicted by the Constitution on March 10, 2017 for supporting Choi Seo-won (formerly Choi Soon-sil) to intervene in state affairs and pursue private interests as a violation of the Constitution. On the other hand, in the case of the trial, bribery was recognized as a crime and the sentence was confirmed just last month.

The impeachment trial can be suspended while the criminal process is ongoing. Article 51 of the Constitutional Law stipulates that “if the criminal process is initiated for the same reason as the request for impeachment, the court may suspend the judicial process.” Because of this, Dr. Seung said, “There is a problem with trial and impeachment at the same time.”

Even if Chief Judge Lim was found not guilty at the first trial, the impeachment requirement was not significantly affected. This is because the trial of the first trial ruled that “although it is possible to punish illegal acts that are unconstitutional, it is not possible to request a crime.”

However, in the legal community, it is highly likely that the Constitutional Court will overrule the decision because the presiding judge will expire at the end of this month. Furthermore, there is an opinion that it is difficult for a decision to challenge an impeachment decision because there must be a serious violation of the constitution that would lead to impeachment.

However, there is a high possibility that the constitution provides supplementary opinions. Constitutional judges can express their opinions in the decision if they judge that the motive for impeachment exists despite the dismissal. Indeed, while the Constitution made the decision to dismiss or dismiss a constitutional petition last month against a criminal investigation bureau of senior public officials, it drew supplementary and minor opinions on the provisions for the transfer of investigative rights. Dr. Seung said, “Because the impeachment decision after the expiration of the vice presiding judges’ term or is an act that is in danger of being repeated, it is possible to make the primary decision regardless of the interests of the cattle. “Said.

Reporter Lee Ga-young [email protected]