Supreme Court postpones Kim Keon Hee ruling after conflicting lower court verdict in Yoon case

The Supreme Court on Wednesday postponed its ruling on former first lady Kim Keon Hee from Thursday to July 24, after the special counsel asked it to consider a lower court ruling that found former President Yoon Suk Yeol partly guilty over free opinion polls.

The special counsel, investigating allegations that Kim had violated the Political Funds Act by receiving opinion polls from self-proclaimed political broker Myung Tae-kyun, submitted the written judgment from Yoon’s Monday trial and requested that the Supreme Court delay its decision by at least one month.

“The first-instance ruling in Yoon Suk Yeol’s political funds case reached conclusions that directly conflict with the rulings in Kim Keon Hee’s case on several key issues,” the special counsel said in its request. It referred to previous trials that had acquitted Kim of related charges, in contrast with the recent ruling against her husband.

The special counsel called for a delay to allow the court to conduct a thorough review and sufficient deliberation of the related case. The Supreme Court is expected to examine the parts of Yoon’s ruling that differ from conclusions reached in Kim’s first and second trials.

The court did not, however, grant the special counsel’s request for a delay of at least one month. Under the law governing the special counsel investigation, the Supreme Court must issue its ruling by July 28.

Yoon and Kim were tried separately on charges of violating the Political Funds Act by receiving 58 opinion polls worth a combined 270 million won ($180,000) free of charge from Myung Tae-kyun.

The courts that heard Kim’s first and second trials acquitted her of the political funds charge. They found it difficult to conclude that Myung had intended to benefit only Yoon and Kim as he had also distributed polling results to other politicians.

Yoon’s first-instance court, however, reached a different conclusion Monday, finding him partly guilty. The court said the length of time over which Myung provided the polling results, as well as the number of polls involved, made it difficult to regard the services as a one-sided favor.

The courts in Kim’s case also found that she and Yoon could not be considered accomplices. By contrast, Yoon’s trial recognized that the two had acted in concert.

Kim’s attorneys said they respect the Supreme Court’s postponement, but would submit a written opinion containing the not guilty verdicts from Kim’s first and second instance trials.

“We do not think the lower court ruling will affect the top court’s decision,” they said.