Nine indictments dismissed in the three special counsel cases... Court strictly judges the scope of the investigation

The special counsel's dismissal ruling examines the strict standards for the scope of investigation and its relevance to the main case. See the Supreme Court's judgment and case examples, along with defense rights issues, at a glance.

Among the cases indicted by the special prosecutors for insurrection, Kim Keonhee, and the death of a Marine that were launched last year, 9 cases received either full or partial dismissal of charges. The courts believe that even if the special prosecutors discovered a new crime during the investigation, they must strictly examine whether the case is reasonably connected to the main allegations. According to a comprehensive review by Kyunghyang Shinmun, of the 9 cases in which the charges were dismissed, 6 were special prosecutor cases investigating allegations related to First Lady Kim Keonhee, and 3 were insurrection special prosecutor cases. Representative examples include a separate bribery charge against a Ministry of Land, Infrastructure and Transport official, part of Kim Yeoseong's embezzlement, and former Unification Church World Headquarters President Yoon Youngho's charge of destruction of evidence; in some cases, the Supreme Court has already finalized the ruling. The Supreme Court has in the past recognized the scope of special prosecutor investigations relatively broadly, but more recently it has been more strictly judging objective relevance to the main case by comprehensively considering the timing and type of the offense, personal connections, and the course of the investigation. The court also pointed out that expanding the scope of a special prosecutor's investigation could infringe on the defendant's right to defense.