Park Soo-hong’s Brother-in-law and Sister-in-law, Accused of Embezzlement, Focus on Property Background in Appeal Trial
The embezzlement case of Park Soo-hong’s long-time agency and family members, his brother-in-law Mr. Park and sister-in-law Mrs. Lee, has been reopened in the appeal trial, with the court requesting a detailed explanation of the property formation and fund flow of both parties.
On the 13th, the 7th Criminal Division of the Seoul High Court (Judge Na) held the 6th appeal trial for Park Soo-hong’s brother-in-law and sister-in-law, who were charged with violating the Act on Aggravated Punishment of Specific Economic Crimes (embezzlement).
Park Soo-hong has been running the agencies Lael and Media Boom with his brother for over 10 years, during which a total of around 6.1 billion Korean won was allegedly embezzled, leading to a legal battle between both sides.
During the trial, the court demanded both sides to provide a detailed account of their property formation, stating, “There is little evidence of personal asset growth for Park Soo-hong, while the Park couple owns several real estates and financial assets.”
The court also added, “An explanation is needed regarding whether it was appropriate for Mr. Park to manage personal accounts.”
While the prosecution initially sentenced Mr. Park to 7 years in prison and Mrs. Lee to 3 years in prison in the first trial, the court only found Mr. Park guilty of corporate embezzlement and sentenced him to 2 years in prison.
Personal embezzlement was acquitted, and Mrs. Lee was also acquitted due to lack of evidence of being an accomplice. As a result, both the prosecution and the defendants appealed.
In the appeal trial, Park Soo-hong volunteered to testify, claiming, “It is difficult to explain the real estates purchased with the salaries and dividends receIVEd by the brother-in-law couple over the years.”
He pointed out the issues of profit-taking, saying, “Not a single real estate was registered under my name for a long time, and the brother-in-law couple explained it as ‘investment for you’.”
He also appealed, “There was only about 30 million Korean won left in my account, and I had to cancel the insurance because I couldn’t afford the security deposit for the lease.”
The authenticity and analysis methods of the accounting books were also discussed in this trial.
The prosecution requested an accounting appraisal, but the court did not accept it citing budget issues, instead proposing to appoint a certified public accountant as a professional expert witness to analyze the data from both sides.
The analysis results are expected to be used as key evidence for sentencing.