Home > Opinion > Editorials

Dropping the Daejang-dong appeal undermines the justice system

Published: 10 Nov. 2025, 00:00

Jung Jin-woo, head of the Seoul Central District Prosecutors’ Office, answers questions from lawmakers during a meeting of the National Assembly’s Legislation and Judiciary Committee on Oct. 23. Jung submitted his resignation on Nov. 8. [YONHAP]

Prosecutors’ decision to drop an appeal in the Daejang-dong development scandal — despite prison sentences handed down in the first trial — has sparked intense backlash. Critics say the move is highly unusual and procedurally opaque.

Investigators and prosecutors on the trial team initially agreed to appeal and received approval from the Seoul Central District Prosecutors’ Office. But the Supreme Prosecutors’ Office reportedly stalled and ultimately rejected it. The decision triggered internal protest, and Seoul Central District Prosecutor General Jung Jin-woo resigned on Nov. 8.

In response to mounting criticism, Acting Prosecutor General Noh Man-seok, who also serves as deputy prosecutor general, said on Nov. 9 that he made the decision “after reports from the lower office, reviewing the Justice Ministry’s opinion, and consulting the head of the Seoul Central District Prosecutors’ Office.” However, many question whether this was truly an independent judgment. Jung later clarified that while he respected the authority of the Supreme Prosecutors’ Office, his office had expressed a different view, prompting his resignation.

By dropping the appeal, certain charges against key defendant Kim Man-bae and others are now irrevocably cleared. Kim, a private investor in the Daejang-dong project, had been sentenced to eight years in prison and fined 42.8 billion won for taking 788.6 billion won in illicit gains and causing 489.5 billion won in losses to the Seongnam Development Corporation. The court did not apply the more serious aggravated breach of trust under the Act on the Aggravated Punishment of Specific Economic Crimes, citing difficulty in calculating losses, instead applying the general breach of trust. Because prosecutors did not appeal, the principle prohibiting unfavorable changes in sentencing locked in the acquittal on the heavier charge — effectively forfeiting the chance to recover most illicit profits.

Observers question why Noh made this decision when Jung, appointed under the Lee Jae Myung administration, favored appealing. Many note it is difficult to separate the decision from the fact that President Lee, as former Seongnam mayor, has been indicted in connection with the same case. The ruling party has already floated dropping charges against him.

The Democratic Party responded by accusing prosecutors who objected to the decision of being “pro-Yoon” and staging “organized insubordination.” While past overreach by prosecutors deserves scrutiny, the court did impose heavy sentences in this case, making claims of excessive prosecution less persuasive.

This is not a procedural dispute but a serious challenge to the integrity of the justice system. The Supreme Prosecutors’ Office must clarify whether and how it consulted the Justice Ministry. Justice Minister Jung Sung-ho, who has said he gives daily verbal instructions to the prosecutor general and other senior prosecutors, should also clarify what role he played in this decision. The public is left wondering whether the process is being driven by a single goal: shielding the president from legal risk.

This article was originally written in Korean and translated by a bilingual reporter with the help of generative AI tools. It was then edited by a native English-speaking editor. All AI-assisted translations are reviewed and refined by our newsroom.