Lee Jae-myung headed for second trial after Supreme Court overturns acquittal

The Supreme Court on Thursday overturned the acquittal of former Democratic Party (DP) leader and presidential candidate Lee Jae-myung and returned the case to the Seoul High Court, signaling a guilty verdict. Lee had been acquitted on appeal of charges of violating the Public Official Election Act.

However, with 33 days remaining before the June 3 presidential election, a retrial and potential appeal are unlikely to be resolved before voting day, meaning Lee’s candidacy remains legally intact.

While the top court found Lee legally guilty, it stopped short of issuing a final verdict — effectively leaving the ultimate judgment to voters, according to legal analysts. Still, the ruling adds judicial uncertainty to Lee’s campaign and is expected to significantly impact the presidential race.

10 of 12 justices rule guilty

In a full bench decision, with Chief Justice Jo Hee-de presiding, the Supreme Court ruled in a 10-2 decision that the lower court “misunderstood the legal interpretation of false statement offenses under election law,” and remanded the case to the Seoul High Court.

This means the court found fault with the appeal’s court’s decision to acquit Lee over comments made about golfing with a now-deceased city official and his explanation for a zoning change in Baekhyeon-dong. The court called for a retrial on both issues in its decision.

Lee was indicted on charges of false statement charges ahead of the 2022 presidential election. In 2021, he claimed not to have known Kim Moon-gi, then the head of development at the Seongnam Development Corporation, when he was Seongnam mayor. Lee also testified during a parliamentary audit that the Ministry of Land, Infrastructure and Transport had pressured the city into upgrading zoning designations in Baekhyeon-dong.

The district court sentenced him to one year in prison with two years of probation — enough to strip him of his candidacy — which was overturned on appeal. The top court on Wednesday sided with the district court.

The central legal distinction between the two rulings was emphasis: The district court prioritized “the overall impression conveyed to voters,” while the appeals court favored “interpretations in the defendant’s favor.” The Supreme Court ruled the former was correct.

Supreme Court rejects ‘editing’ defense

The court upheld the lower court’s view that Lee’s remarks on a golf outing with Kim constituted a false statement.

“The People Power Party released a photo suggesting I played golf with [Kim],” Lee told news outlet Channel A on Dec. 29, 2021. “When I looked closely, I saw they cut out a group photo. That’s manipulated.”

The appeals court found that calling a cropped photo “manipulated” didn’t necessarily deny the golf outing.

But the Supreme Court found otherwise, saying that “the statement implies the defendant did not play golf with Kim during an overseas business trip. It cannot be interpreted in multiple ways as the appellate court claimed.”

Likewise, the top court rejected the appeal’s court’s opinion that Lee’s Baekhyeon-dong claim that been “pressured and threatened” by the ministry were too vague to constitute falsehood.

“Seongnam upgraded zoning on its own, and there was no pressure or threat from the ministry,” said the Supreme Court. “This was not exaggerated rhetoric or an abstract opinion, but a factual assertion.”

‘Kwon Soon-il precedent’ overturned

Legal analysts say Wednesday’s ruling effectively overturned the “Kwon Soon-il precedent,” which saved Lee from conviction in 2020.

At the time, the Supreme Court threw out a lower court’s conviction of Lee — then Gyeonggi’s governor — for claiming he had never tried to commit his brother to a mental institution. The court found the statement to be an opinion, not a false claim.

The appeal’s court at hand had cited this precedent, but the Jo court rejected its applicability.

Justices Lee Heung-gu and Oh Kyeong-mi, both appointed by former President Moon Jae-in, were the two in dissent.

They wrote in their dissent that Lee’s comments left “room for multiple interpretations” and that convicting him violated principles of legal clarity and the constitutional rights to political expression and fair campaigning.

Fast-tracked verdict aims to limit political fallout

The Supreme Court’s ruling came notably fast. While the initial trial took 799 days, the top court issued its ruling just 36 days after the appeals court’s decision — well ahead of the June 26 deadline under the judiciary’s internal “6-3-3 rule” for election law cases, meaning six months for the initial ruling, three months each for appeals.

Legal experts say the court sought to avoid interfering with the official campaign period and reduce uncertainty before the candidate registration deadline on May 11.

“If Lee had been elected and the trial was unresolved, proceedings could have been frozen for five years under Article 84 of the Constitution,” said a lawyer who previously served as a research judge at the top court. “That’s why the court needed to rule before June 3 but avoided a verdict during the campaign itself.”

The will of the people

“I will follow the will of the people,” Lee said Thursday, responding to the ruling.

“This ruling goes completely against what I had expected, so I’ll need to review the details before giving a formal position,” he said after meeting workers in Jongno District, central Seoul. “The law reflects the consensus of the people, and the people’s will is what matters most.”

“Political rivals may be indulging in all sorts of hope and speculation, but politics ultimately belongs to the people,” said Lee, when asked whether he would withdraw from the race. “I will follow their will.”

BY KIM JUN-YOUNG, CHO MUN-GYU [kim.minyoung5@joongang.co.kr]