[ad_1]
“Need for substantial truth” versus “forced substantial testimony”
Kyung-Shim Jung says, “I totally refuse to testify.”
After that, the prosecution refused to respond to all journalistic matters.
Jeong Kyung-Shim’s son also said, “I will not testify.”
Professor Kyung-Shim Chung and his son from Dongyang University went to the trial of Choi Kang-wook, a representative of the Open Democratic Party, accused of issuing a fake intern certificate, and they shut their mouths side by side saying they would practice the ‘right to refuse to testify’.
After former Justice Minister Cho Kook attended as a witness to Professor Chung’s trial and rejected all newspapers, saying, “I will exercise Article 148 of the Criminal Procedure Law,” the wife and son also refused to testify in court.
On the 15th, Judge Jeong Jong-gun, who was solely responsible for Crime 9 of the Seoul Central District Court, held the fourth trial of Choi, accused of obstructing business. On this day, Professor Jeong’s mother and father came out as witnesses.
Before the witness newspaper, the judge said, as usual, “In this case, it was stated in the indictment that Jung Kyung-Shim himself had conspired, so we will inform you in advance that there is a reason for the denial of the testimony”. There is, ”he said. “I am trying to explain the denial of the testimony. Your honor, your honor. I have been subpoenaed as a witness in this trial, so I would like to completely refuse to testify. He said, “I will be grateful if you allow me.” He said, “The prosecution said it was false that my son was an intern in Choi’s office and brought an accusation against him and against Choi.” “So I am on trial. Therefore, I would like to refuse to testify in this court. “
The prosecution said: “Since refusal to testify is one of the witness rights stipulated in the Criminal Procedure Law, we cannot blame the request to refuse to testify. However, even if the prosecutors revealed their intention to refuse to respond, it was deemed necessary to reveal the substantial truth through a newspaper. He refuted.
“Professor Jeong did not respond to the prosecution’s investigation from a certain point after his arrest, so he was unable to investigate at all. Even if Professor Jeong refuses to make the entire statement, he can listen to individual newspapers and declare content that be beneficial to him. ” .
Furthermore, “Professor Jeong has already attended the trial of Cho’s fifth village nephew as a witness and refused to testify, but some responded,” he explained.
In addition, the prosecution said: “In Professor Jeong’s trial, former Minister Cho expressed his intention to refuse to testify completely, but please note that the individual newspapers were conducted in accordance with the provisions of the Criminal Law.” . “Please direct the lawsuit so the truth can be revealed.” Order.
Therefore, the attorney representing Choi said, “The fifth village nephew’s trial is a completely separate matter, and it is a completely different matter.” “Although it is a useless procedure, it is practically like forcing witnesses to testify, so there is no need to ask and respond to many witnesses. I mentioned.
He said, “Although there is already a clear reason to refuse to testify in law, asking a question does not help uncover the truth,” he said. “I think my opinion should be through an opinion letter.”
After hearing the opinions of both parties, the judge said: “There is no explicit question as to whether a batch question can be rejected under the Criminal Law, but in principle, all testimonies cannot be rejected and, in general, it seems be interpreted as capable of rejecting any special circumstance “. Said.
Along with this, he allowed a witness journal for Professor Jeong, saying, “It seems appropriate to start a witness journal for now” and “Just subtract a lot of real arguments from the issues you were given and examine them just to confirm the facts.”
In subsequent newspapers, the prosecution asked questions such as: “What was the reason why your son got an internship at the Cheongmaek Law Firm?” And “Do you ask CEO Choi for an internship?”, But Professor Jeong repeatedly replied “I will not make a statement.” And he refused to testify.
Previously, Cho also refused to answer all the questions from the prosecution while exercising her right to refuse to testify at Professor Jeong’s latest trial. At that time, former Minister Cho only repeated the answer that “we follow article 148 of the Criminal Procedure Law.”
Article 148 of the Criminal Procedure Law stipulates that “any person may refuse to declare that their relatives, etc., are subject to criminal prosecution or may be sentenced.”
His son Jomo, who came out after the newspaper witness against Professor Jeong, also rejected all of the prosecution’s journalistic matters, saying that he would exercise his right to refuse to testify.
Mr. Cho said, “I was summoned as a witness in this trial, but I do not want to testify in its entirety. The prosecution filed an accusation against Choi and my mother.” In the course of the investigation of the case, I was investigated as a reference, but (the prosecution) informed me of the rights of the suspect ”.
He said, “I don’t know what kind of charges will be brought against me in the future.” Therefore, I would like to reject it ”.
In response, the prosecution argued: “It is difficult to convince him to annul what he said in the prosecutor’s office and remain silent,” Choi’s lawyer said, saying: “It is desirable not to ask for the efficiency of the trial and the right to refuse to testify. “
The judge approved the witness newspaper, saying: “Please listen to the individual questions and decide whether to exercise the right to refuse to testify.” After that, the prosecution continued to ask questions, but Mr. Jo also gave consistent responses, saying, “I will not make a statement.”
Choi’s next trial is scheduled for November 17 at 4 p.m.
In October 2017, while working as a lawyer at the Cheongmaek Law Firm, he was brought to trial on charges of interfering with university admissions matters by issuing a false intern certificate for his son Cho at the request of Professor Jeong, wife. of former minister Jo.
[서울=뉴시스]Copyright by dongA.com All rights reserved.
