The Second Comprehensive Special Investigation Team, led by Kwon Chang-young, has concluded its 180-day investigation, referring a total of 58 individuals, including former President Yoon Suk Yeol and Kim Geon-hee, to trial. The strategy of focusing on filing charges in the final stages of the investigation, termed 'Heavy Tail,' has been deemed successful. However, while the numbers appear impressive, the substance of the findings raises questions.
Notably, many key cases handed over to the Second Comprehensive Special Investigation Team are being transferred back to the National Police Agency. Significant allegations, such as the change of the endpoint for the Seoul-Yangpyeong Expressway, the notebook of Noh Sang-won, and the alleged interference by the Suwon District Prosecutor's Office in the presidential office investigation, remain unresolved. Given that the Second Comprehensive Special Investigation Team spent over six months investigating cases received from previous agencies, criticisms questioning the necessity of the special investigation are unavoidable.
More concerning is that some of the cases the special investigation team has charged are expected to face significant legal challenges in court. A prominent example is the indictment of former Major General Cho Sung-hyun, who was the head of the 1st Security Brigade of the Capital Defense Command. He issued orders during a state of emergency that directed troops not to cross the Seogang Bridge while moving to the National Assembly. The previous special investigation team, led by Jo Eun-seok, determined that Cho contributed to the end of the emergency and did not pursue charges against him, even awarding him a medal for his service. In contrast, the Second Comprehensive Special Investigation Team reached the opposite conclusion, asserting that his actions constituted participation in a rebellion.
The two special investigation teams have clashed not just over legal interpretations but also in their conclusions. The rebellion investigation team communicated to the Second Comprehensive Special Investigation Team that there were no grounds for indictment against Cho, and both sides publicly debated until just before the indictment. The same incident was investigated by both teams, resulting in one labeling Cho as a 'contributor to the end of the rebellion' while the other deemed him a 'key participant in the rebellion.' This starkly illustrates the institutional flaws within the special investigation system. The law governing the Second Special Investigation Team lists 17 categories of investigation targets but does not clarify whether a different special investigation team can reopen cases already disposed of by another team or what conditions must be met to do so.
A senior prosecutor from the Seoul Central District Prosecutor's Office, speaking on condition of anonymity, stated, 'If different special investigation teams reach different conclusions on the same facts, it undermines the predictability of investigations and legal stability,' adding that 'the public's trust in the special investigation itself could decline, making institutional reform urgent.'
The evaluation of the Second Comprehensive Special Investigation Team will now take place in court. If key defendants are acquitted or if there are significant issues with maintaining charges, the repercussions could be substantial. This would not merely be a case of 'investigative failure' but could also lead to criticisms that the team overreached in its efforts to overturn the previous special investigation's findings.
The question now is straightforward: Is the indictment of 58 individuals a genuine achievement of the Second Comprehensive Special Investigation Team, or was it a rushed effort to produce results in the final two weeks of the investigation? The verdict in the case of former Major General Cho will serve as a litmus test for whether the Second Comprehensive Special Investigation Team's work was a 're-investigation that uncovered truths missed by the first team' or an 'overreaching re-investigation aimed at producing a different conclusion.' While the special investigation has concluded, the scrutiny of its findings is just beginning.
* This article has been translated by AI.
Copyright ⓒ Aju Press All rights reserved.