Case Explained: Chief Justice Cho Becomes First Target of Law Distortion Crime Investigation – Legal Perspective

Chief Justice Cho Hee-dae has effectively become the first target of investigation under the newly enacted law distortion crime (Article 123-2 of the Criminal Act), but concerns persist within and outside the legal community. As complaints and accusations related to the law distortion crime surge, experts warn that judicial decisions by judges and prosecutors may become constrained, potentially leading to trial delays and case suppression.

According to legal sources on the 15th, attorney Lee Byung-chul submitted a complaint to police on the 12th seeking prosecution of Chief Justice Cho and Supreme Court Justice Park Young-jae (former Director of the National Court Administration) for law distortion. Lee claims that Chief Justice Cho intentionally distorted criminal procedure law when he reversed and remanded President Lee Jae-myung’s public election law violation case with a guilty verdict disposition in May last year. The Supreme Court received the case on March 28 last year and overturned the appellate court’s not guilty verdict just 34 days later on May 1, sending the case back to the Seoul High Court. Justice Park was the presiding justice before the case was referred to the Supreme Court’s en banc panel.

The case was initially assigned to Yongin West Police Station based on attorney Lee’s residential address. On the 13th, the case was transferred to the Seoul Metropolitan Police Agency’s Regional Investigation Unit. Chief Justice Cho’s case has effectively entered the “countdown” as the first case under the new law.

Experts unanimously agree that complaints and accusations under the law distortion crime will likely continue to pile up. The law distortion crime stipulates imprisonment of up to 10 years and suspension of qualifications for up to 10 years for judges, prosecutors, or investigation officials who act with the purpose of unlawfully or improperly benefiting others or harming their rights during trials, indictments, or investigations. Given that investigations, indictments, and trials inherently divide parties into suspects and victims, guilty and not guilty, one side may always harbor dissatisfaction.

Experts particularly warn of significant side effects from the surge in law distortion complaints. As such complaints increase, not only investigative agencies but also judges and prosecutors may feel pressure in determining criminality, potentially causing prolonged trials or case suppression.

“The current structure allowing anyone, not just the affected parties, to file accusations for law distortion is highly likely to constrain judgment in investigations, indictments, and trials,” said Jang Young-soo, professor at Korea University Law School. “A vicious cycle may repeat, with accusations piling up each time investigators, prosecutors, or judges make decisions.” He added, “Trial by public opinion may become reality due to various side effects, ultimately leading to the disappearance of judicial independence.”

Critics also point out that the public will bear the brunt of delays in investigations, indictments, and trials. The targets of law distortion complaints are judges, prosecutors, and investigators. Experts agree that if these officials are investigated or put on trial, decisions by investigative agencies and final verdicts by courts could be delayed. Concerns also arise that those with extreme political views or so-called “professional accusers” may trigger unnecessary investigations or trials.

An academic source who requested anonymity criticized, “Realistically, if investigators, prosecutors, or judges cannot properly perform their duties due to investigations or trials against them, the harm from delayed investigations and trials will be passed on to ordinary citizens. The existing judicial system itself could be damaged.” The source added, “Judicial independence means judges should rule according to their conscience and the law without fear of political pressure or lawsuits. But the law distortion crime has instead opened a channel for judges to be harassed by case parties.”