Yoo Dong-gyu, former head of the Planning Division of the Seongnam Urban Development Corporation. random news
Jeong Jin-sang, the former head of the political coordination office in the presidential office, who is closest to Lee Jae-myung, representative of the Democratic Party, asked the court to ban Yoo Dong-gyu, the former head of the planning headquarters of the Seongnam Urban Development Corporation , from appearing on YouTube. Former Chief Jung is currently in custody on charges of receiving money or other valuables from Daejangdong developers.
On the 3rd preparatory date for the bribery and post-bribery case held at the Seoul 23rd Central District Court Criminal Agreement hearing (Chief Judge Cho Byeong-gu) on the 28th, former Chief Jeong’s lawyer said, “It is likely very of creating prejudice and prejudice.” she was asked this way.
At the same time, “Chief Yoo is a co-defendant with former chief executive Jeong, but he is a person who makes conflicting claims.” “It is unusual for a trial party to talk about a defendant outside the courtroom via YouTube, which is not found in normal trial precedents.” he demanded.
Regarding this, the judge replied, “I will give an appropriate warning, but (Chief Yoo) cannot obstruct the person’s freedom of expression and press.”
Jeong Jin-, former head of the political affairs coordination office in the representative office, sang. Reporter Hwang Jin-hwan
Director Jeong’s side repeatedly expressed discomfort over Yoo’s appearance on YouTube, saying, “The arrested defendant (Chief Jeong) is sure to be terrified.”
In particular, he also spoke of ‘equity’ between the former head of headquarters Yoo, who was released because the arrest period ended, and the former head, who was arrested. While Director Yoo Jeon conducts a public opinion battle over the counter, Jeong asks that this part be taken into consideration when deciding whether to bail or not, as Chief Jeong cannot make any specific stance.
On the other hand, the court later decided on Chung’s claim that the prosecution’s indictment violated the Japanese principle of the prosecution, but requested an additional review by the prosecution. As it is a recent trend in the legal world to judge strictly whether the Japanese principle of the indictment is violated or not, the purpose is not to explain too much the circumstances of the criminal act described in the indictment .
The court rejected the request for a constitutional test made by former chief Jeong. Jeong’s side argued that Article 201-2, Paragraph 2 of the Criminal Procedure Act, which requires an arrest warrant to be issued to an unarrested suspect regardless of the reason for arrest or detention, is violate the Constitution. However, the court will decide whether the former boss should be bailed after seeing the progress of the trial later.
The court intends to close the case preparation date on the 10th of next month and begin the trial process in earnest from the 17th.
