Daejangdong Suspicion Previewed 5 Major Court Issues
“The seeds didn’t even work” Interview with Nam Wook
“Proof that there is no adhesion” “Listen to Kim Man-bae’s request”
Additional burden of 112 billion won on private businesses
“My profit will decrease” “Profit will increase”
Lee Jae-myeong, leader of the Democratic Party of Korea, said on the 30th that he would respond to the prosecution’s request for a ‘second appearance’, but, as in the first round, it seems that he will practically exercise his right to remain silent in the investigation. Therefore, it is expected that the truth of the ‘Daejang-dong suspicion’ will eventually be revealed through a battle between CEO Lee, the Daejang-dong gang, and the prosecution that will take place in court.
Summarizing the coverage of the Seoul Shinmun on the 30th, the battle issues that will take place in court in the future can be divided into five major categories.
First of all, who is the owner of ‘42.8 billion won’ in Cheonhwa Dongin No. 1 profit? In a 33-page statement submitted to the prosecution, CEO Lee said, “Attorney Min-yong Jeong, who plays a secondary role, also receives 10 billion won, but it is out of common sense that Yoo Dong-gyu (former head of the planning division of Seongnam Urban Development Corporation) does not have a share of 42.8 billion won.” In the end, he insisted that it was the responsibility of former general manager Yoo.
However, lawyer Nam-wook insisted, “Including CEO Lee, Jin-sang Jeong, Yong Kim, and Yoo Dong-gyu all aides should be viewed as ‘general possessions’.” Collective ownership is a legal term that refers to the form of ownership of a single property by multiple people.
Attorney Nam also added, “Mr. Kim Man-bae, the major shareholder of Hwacheon Daeyu, received Jeong Jin-sang’s consent when borrowing business expenses from Cheonhwa Dongin No. 1.”
In particular, the lawyer of former general manager Yu told the reporters as he came out after the trial of the Daejang-dong case that day, “If an individual like Yoo was the owner of that large amount of money, he would have made at least a minimum safety device such as writing a contract in common sense.” I thought it was something that no one would touch.”
There are different interpretations of the meaning of lawyer Nam’s past interview, “(I tried to lobby the mayor of Seongnam), but it didn’t work.” Representative Lee presented this sentence in his statement as evidence that there was no collusion with the Daejang-dong gang. However, lawyer Nam refuted, saying, “I was psychologically shaken because I asked him to say that Man-bae Kim committed suicide.”
It is also a key issue whether Daejang-dong operators are provided with preferential treatment.
CEO Lee said that he made private contractors pay an additional 112 billion won for tunnel construction and reservoir construction.
However, the prosecution believes that the floor area ratio of the housing site was raised from 180% to 195% in return for the additional levy, and that the opening of the Seopangyo Tunnel was explicitly included in the approval of the implementation plan, resulting in increased profits for private operators. Attorney Nam makes a similar argument.
A battle is also foreshadowed as to whether CEO Lee recognized in advance whether information on the development of Wirye New Town was leaked to private operators.
In his statement, CEO Lee attributed the responsibility to him, saying, “I wonder if former head Yoo informed me of the crime.”
Then, Jeon Yu criticized, saying, “The information on the inside of Seongnam City that was delivered to the Daejang-dong gang was in accordance with CEO Lee’s instructions,” and “they are trying to pass the responsibility on to a powerless individual who once helped them.”
Reporters Baek Min-kyung and Kwak Jin-woong
