On September 16, during the fifth hearing of the appeal for O Se-hoon, the mayor of Seoul, at the Seoul High Court's Criminal Division 7, the voice of Myung Tae-kyun was played through a speaker. The recording, mixed with dialect and uneven sound quality, prompted the presiding judge to request, "Please turn up the volume." While some parts were clear, others were not.
"Anyway, O Se-hoon doesn’t know. Don’t worry. I’ll handle it myself," Myung said.
The atmosphere in the courtroom shifted. Central to the prosecution's allegations is the claim that Mayor O commissioned Myung for an undisclosed opinion poll, with Kim Han-jung covering the costs. However, in the actual conversation recorded in 2021, Myung indicated that O was unaware of the polling process.
Other parts of the conversation followed. "It doesn’t matter whether he knows or not..." Kim also stated, "I thought that no matter how the poll was conducted, O Se-hoon would win," adding that he believed Myung's assurance to produce favorable results, but the outcome did not reflect that.
Myung claimed he financed the polling himself. While disputes over the interpretation of the entire recording remain, the conversation played in court on that day seemed to diverge significantly from the prosecution's claims that O's directives and Kim's financial support were prearranged.
Despite the prosecution's objections, the court accepted the recording as impeachment evidence, citing a lack of circumstances suggesting it was obtained illegally or was false or manipulated. O's defense attorney argued that the recording not only undermined Myung's credibility but also served as active counter-evidence showing the prosecution's claims were untrue.
The prosecution quickly countered, suggesting that one of the three submitted files might not be the original and that Kim had selectively submitted only three out of 35 recordings that favored him. They expressed suspicion that Kim had concealed the files and only presented them during the appeal.
In response, Kim retorted, "I’m sorry, but it seems you didn’t try very hard to find them," claiming that the prosecution had only asked about it once. He countered the prosecution's assertion that he hid the recordings by stating that during the investigation, they did not actively verify the location of his previous phone.
Kim stated he cooperated with the investigation, allowing searches of his residence and office in Seoul, as well as his vacation home in Jeju, even providing the password for the vacation home. He also disputed the prosecution's account of the search at his Jeju home, asserting, "That person was with me," implying that if he had intended to conceal evidence, he would not have cooperated so fully.
Kim's demeanor during this exchange reflected a certain cynicism toward the prosecution. However, it was not merely emotional mockery. For the prosecution to claim that evidence was concealed, they must prove that Kim knowingly failed to submit the phone and recordings. Kim explained that he had changed phones multiple times and believed he had lost the problematic old phone in Jeju, only to find it later in a storage area at his vacation home. The investigative agency also failed to locate that phone during the search.
Whether Kim's statements are entirely true will need to be verified through forensic results and the remaining recordings. However, his detailed rebuttal regarding the search process and the prosecution's verification attempts provided a significant degree of objectivity against the prosecution's claims of "intentional concealment."
The key point of the hearing was not merely Kim's verbal sparring with the prosecution. The fact that Myung stated in a conversation with Kim before the case became public that "O Se-hoon doesn’t know" is crucial. If Myung's testimony in court conflicts with his recorded voice, the court must determine which is more credible.
Myung's testimony was a key pillar supporting the guilty verdict in the first trial. The recording that could potentially undermine that pillar was played in the appeal court, and the court accepted it as evidence. Verification of the file's authenticity and overall context remains. However, Myung's statement, "O Se-hoon doesn’t know," echoed in the courtroom, casting a heavy shadow over the first trial's judgment.
The appellate court is expected to conclude arguments at the next session. It is still too early to predict a verdict. However, if the prosecution fails to present additional objective evidence to support Myung's changed testimony, the principle of reasonable doubt in criminal trials may lean in favor of Mayor O. This hearing appears to be a significant turning point that could overturn the guilty verdict from the first trial.
* This article has been translated by AI.
Copyright ⓒ Aju Press All rights reserved.