Lee Jae-myung Hit with New Legal Challenges Ahead of South Korea Snap Election
On May 1, South Korea's Supreme Court overturned the acquittal of opposition leader Lee Jae-myung in an election law violation case, remanding it to the Seoul High Court.
Lee, a top contender in the June 3 snap presidential election, had been indicted for publishing false information during the 2022 presidential campaign.
The case centers on Lee's comments on rezoning the Korea Food Research Institute site in Seongnam City. It also involves his connection to the late Kim Moon-ki, a former deputy director at the Seongnam Urban Development Corporation. Both controversies date back to his tenure as the city's mayor.
A district court convicted the opposition leader in November 2024 and handed down a one-year prison sentence with two years' probation. That decision was overturned in March 2025, when the High Court found Lee not guilty.
In a 10-2 majority, South Korea's highest court ruled on Thursday that Lee's past remarks did in fact constitute false information. Furthermore, it found that the earlier court had misapplied relevant statutes. The High Court, with a new panel of judges, will rehear the case starting on May 15.
While the ruling is unlikely to be finalized before the June vote, the cloud of legal uncertainty undercuts Lee's momentum at a critical moment. Lee Jae-myung and DP members attend the 21st Presidential Election Task Force launching ceremony. (©Park Chan-dae FB)
Under South Korean law, candidates who violate the Public Offices Election Act face serious penalties. Those fined more than ₩1 million KRW (approximately $700) are barred from running for office for five years. Receiving a prison sentence can extend the ban to ten years.
"Barring any new material evidence, the appellate court will have little choice but to align with the Supreme Court's legal interpretation," said Kang Yong-suk, an attorney and former lawmaker. "Even if Lee seeks another appeal, the Supreme Court will eventually hand down a guilty verdict within six months."
Should Lee win the presidential race, a conviction after taking office would force him to step down, Kang said.
Some, however, argue that criminal trials and indictments initiated before the inauguration must be suspended during a president's term in office.
"Article 84 of South Korea's Constitution bars a sitting president from criminal prosecution during their term, except in cases of insurrection or treason," said Lee Dong-hwan, an attorney experienced in handling criminal cases. "Lee Jae-myung would be no exception."
Legal experts remain divided on whether the term prosecution extends to trials already underway before a presidential candidate takes office.
At a National Assembly hearing last October, Kim Jung-won, secretary-general of the Constitutional Court, was asked a key question. Lawmakers wanted to know whether a sitting president would lose their position if convicted in a case that began before taking office. He responded, "Legally speaking, it appears to be so."
Ultimately, the final interpretation will rest with the nation's Constitutional Court and the Supreme Court. DP lawmakers denounce the recent Supreme Court ruling as a judicial coup and political interference. (©Park Chan-dae FB)
Responding to Thursday's decision, Lee Jae-myung stated, "Well, it's a completely different direction from what I thought...But what matters most is the will of the people."
Despite growing pressure from the ruling party and even some factions within his camp to step down, Lee has vowed to press on with his campaign.
His party, which has faced criticism for being seen as the party of Lee Jae-myung, appears largely united in support.
On May 2, the opposition Democratic Party of Korea (DP) introduced a bill to amend the Criminal Procedure Act. The proposed change would suspend ongoing criminal trials for any individual elected president. This move is widely seen as an attempt to shield Lee should he take office.
Beyond the election violation case, the opposition chief is entangled in four other criminal trials on charges ranging from coaching a witness, corruption, and third-party bribery.
A conviction in any of these cases could inflict lasting damage on Lee's reputation, leaving his political legacy in tatters.
Author: Kenji Yoshida
Hashtags
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
Winnipeg Free Press
7 hours ago
- Winnipeg Free Press
What to know about the Supreme Court ruling 10 years ago that legalized same-sex marriage in the US
COLUMBUS, Ohio (AP) — A landmark U.S. Supreme Court ruling 10 years ago this month, on June 26, 2015, legalized same-sex marriage across the U.S. The Obergefell v. Hodges decision followed years of national wrangling over the issue, during which some states moved to protect domestic partnerships or civil unions for same-sex partners and others declared marriage could exist only between one man and one woman. In plaintiff James Obergefell's home state of Ohio, voters had overwhelmingly approved such an amendment in 2004 — effectively mirroring the federal Defense of Marriage Act, which denied federal recognition of same-sex couples. That laid the political groundwork for the legal challenge that bears his name. Here's what you need to know about the lawsuit, the people involved and the 2015 ruling's immediate and longer term effects: Who are James Obergefell and Rick Hodges? Obergefell and John Arthur, who brought the initial legal action, were long-time partners living in Cincinnati. They had been together for nearly two decades when Arthur was diagnosed with ALS, or amyotrophic lateral sclerosis, in 2011. Obergefell became Arthur's caregiver as the incurable condition ravaged his health over time. When in 2013 the Supreme Court struck down the federal Defense of Marriage Act, which had denied federal recognition of same-sex marriages, the pair acted quickly to get married. Their union was not allowed in Ohio, so they boarded a plane to Maryland and, because of Arthur's fragile health, married on the tarmac. It was when they learned their union would not be listed on Arthur's death certificate that the legal battle began. They went to court seeking recognition of their marriage on the document and their request was granted by a court. Ohio appealed and the case began its way up the ladder to the nation's high court. A Democrat, Obergefell made an unsuccessful run for the Ohio House in 2022. Rick Hodges, a Republican, was director of the Ohio Department of Health from August 2014 to 2017. The department handles death certificates in the state. Before being appointed by then-Gov. John Kasich, Hodges served five years in the Ohio House. Acquainted through the court case, he and Obergefell have become friends. What were the legal arguments? The lawsuit eventually titled Obergefell v. Hodges argued that marriage is guaranteed under the U.S. Constitution's Fourteenth Amendment, specifically the due process and equal protection clauses. The litigation consolidated several lawsuits brought by same-sex couples in Ohio, Kentucky, Michigan and Tennessee who had been denied marriage licenses or recognition for their out-of-state marriages and whose cases had resulted in conflicting opinions in federal circuit courts. In a 5-4 decision, the Supreme Court ruled the right to marry is fundamental, calling it 'inherent in the liberty of the person,' and therefore protected by the Constitution. The ruling effectively nullified state-level bans on same-sex marriages, as well as laws declining to recognize same-sex marriages performed in other jurisdictions. The custody, property, tax, insurance and business implications of of the decision have also had sweeping impacts on other areas of law. How did the country react to the decision? Same-sex marriages surged in the immediate wake of the Obergefell decision, as dating couples and those already living as domestic partners flocked to courthouses and those houses of worship that welcomed them to legalize their unions. Over the ensuing decade, the number of married same-sex couples has more than doubled to an estimated 823,000, according to June data compiled by the Williams Institute at the University of California Los Angeles School of Law. Not all Americans supported the change. Standing as a national symbol of opponents was Kim Davis, a then-clerk in Rowan County, Kentucky, who refused to issue marriage licenses on religious grounds. She was briefly jailed, touching off weeks of protests as gay marriage foes around the country praised her defiance. Davis, a Republican, lost her bid for reelection in 2018. She was ordered to pay thousands in attorney fees incurred by a couple unable to get a license from her office. She has appealed in July 2024 in a challenge that seeks to overturn Obergefell. As he reflects of the decision's 10th anniversary, Obergefell has worried aloud about the state of LGBTQ+ rights in the country and the possibility that a case could reach the Supreme Court that might overturn the decision bearing his name. Eight states have introduced resolutions this year urging a reversal and the Southern Baptist Convention voted overwhelmingly at its meeting in Dallas earlier this month in favor of banning gay marriage and seeing the Obergefell decision overturned. Meanwhile, more than a dozen states have moved to strengthen legal protections for same-sex married couples in case Obergefell is ever overturned. In 2025, about 7 in 10 Americans — 68% — said marriages between same-sex couples should be recognized by the law as valid, up from 60% in May 2015.
Winnipeg Free Press
14 hours ago
- Winnipeg Free Press
Nations react to US strikes on Iran with calls for diplomacy
The U.S. strike on Iran fueled fears that Israel's war with Tehran could escalate to a wider regional conflict, and other countries began reacting Sunday with calls for diplomacy and words of caution. President Donald Trump had said Thursday that he would decide within two weeks whether to get involved. In the end, it took just days to decide, and Washington inserted itself into Israel's campaign with its early Sunday attack. It remained unclear early how much damage had been inflicted, but Iran had pledged to retaliate if the U.S. joined the Israeli assault. Some have questioned whether a weakened Iran would capitulate or remain defiant and begin striking with allies at U.S. targets scattered across the Gulf region. Here is a look at reaction from governments and officials around the world. United Nations U.N. Secretary General Antonio Guterres said he was 'gravely alarmed' by the use of force by the United States. 'There is a growing risk that this conflict could rapidly get out of control – with catastrophic consequences for civilians, the region, and the world,' he said in a statement on the social media platform X. 'I call on Member States to de-escalate.' 'There is no military solution. The only path forward is diplomacy.' New Zealand New Zealand Foreign Minister Winston Peters urged 'all parties to return to talks.' He wouldn't tell reporters Sunday whether New Zealand supported President Trump's actions, saying they had only just happened. The three-time foreign minister said the crisis is 'the most serious I've ever dealt with' and that 'critical further escalation is avoided.' 'Diplomacy will deliver a more enduring resolution than further military action,' he said. China A flash commentary from China's government-run media asked whether the U.S. is repeating 'its Iraq mistake in Iran.' The online piece by CGTN, the foreign-language arm of the state broadcaster, said the U.S. strikes mark a dangerous turning point. 'History has repeatedly shown that military interventions in the Middle East often produce unintended consequences, including prolonged conflicts and regional destabilization,' it said, citing the American invasion of Iraq in 2003. It said a measured, diplomatic approach that prioritizes dialogue over military confrontation offers the best hope for stability in the Middle East. Japan Japan's Prime Minister Shigeru Ishiba is expected to hold a meeting with key ministers Sunday afternoon to discuss the impact from the U.S. attack on Iranian nuclear facilities, according to Japan's NHK television. Japan's largest-circulation newspaper Yomiuri is distributing an extra edition on the attack in Tokyo. South Korea South Korea's presidential office said it would hold an emergency meeting Sunday to discuss the security and economic ramifications of the U.S. strikes and potential South Korean responses. Australia Australia, which shuttered its embassy in Tehran and evacuated staff Friday, continued to push for a diplomatic end to the conflict. 'We have been clear that Iran's nuclear and ballistic missile program has been a threat to international peace and security,' a government official said in a written statement. 'We note the U.S. President's statement that now is the time for peace.' 'The security situation in the region is highly volatile. We continue to call for de-escalation, dialogue and diplomacy.'
Winnipeg Free Press
16 hours ago
- Winnipeg Free Press
Japan and South Korea mark 60 years of ties despite lingering tension and political uncertainty
TOKYO (AP) — Japan and South Korea are marking the 60th anniversary of the normalization of their diplomatic relations Sunday. The two Asian powers, rivals and neighbors, have often had little to celebrate, much of their rancor linked to Japan's brutal colonial rule of Korea in the early 20th century. Things have gotten better in recent years, but both nations — each a strong ally of the United States — now face political uncertainty and a growing unease about the future of their ties. Here's a look at one of Northeast Asia's most crucial relationships, from both capitals, by two correspondents from The Associated Press. The view from Seoul, by Kim Tong-hyung South Korea's new liberal president, Lee Jae Myung, is determined to break sharply from the policies of his disgraced predecessor, Yoon Suk Yeol, who now faces a trial on charges of leading an insurrection over his imposition of martial law in December. Relations with Japan, however, are one area where Lee, who describes himself as a pragmatist in foreign policy, may find himself cautiously building on Yoon's approach. Before his removal from office in April, the conservative former president tried to repair relations with Japan. Yoon wanted to also tighten the countries' three-way security cooperation with Washington to counter North Korean nuclear threats. In 2023, Yoon announced a South Korea-funded compensation plan for colonial-era forced laborers. That decision caused a strong backlash from victims and their supporters, who had demanded direct payments from Japanese companies and a fresh apology from Tokyo. Yoon's outreach boosted tourism and business ties, but there's still lingering resentment in South Korea that Japan failed to reciprocate Seoul's diplomatic concession by addressing historical grievances more sincerely. While advocating for pragmatism and problem-solving in foreign policy, Lee has also long criticized Japan for allegedly clinging to its imperialist past and blamed that for hurting cooperation between the countries. Some experts say the stability of the countries' improved ties could soon be tested, possibly around the Aug. 15 anniversary of Korea's liberation from Japanese colonial rule at the end of World War II, when Lee is expected to publicly address the nation's painful history with Japan. Some in Seoul want Japanese Prime Minister Shigeru Ishiba to mark the anniversary with a stronger statement of remorse over Japan's wartime past to put bilateral ties on firmer ground. While wartime history will always linger in the background of Seoul-Tokyo relations, Lee and Ishiba may face a more immediate concern: U.S. President Donald Trump's rising tariffs and other America-first trade policies. South Korea's Hankyoreh newspaper in an editorial this week called for South Korea and Japan to 'collaborate immediately' on a joint response to Trump's policies, arguing that the proposed U.S. tariffs on automobiles pose similar threats to both countries' trade-dependent economies. The view from Tokyo, by Mari Yamaguchi Ishiba, eager to improve ties with Seoul, has acknowledged Japan's wartime aggression and has shown more empathy to Asian victims than his recent predecessors. His first encounter with Lee seemed positive, despite worries in Japan about South Korea's stance under a liberal leader known for attacks on Japan's wartime past. Lee, in that meeting with Ishiba at the G7, likened the two countries to 'neighbors sharing the same front yard' and called for building a future-oriented relationship that moves beyond their 'small differences and disagreements.' Ishiba and Lee agreed to closely communicate and to cooperate on a range of issues, including North Korea's nuclear and missile development. Under a 1965 normalization treaty, Japan provided $500 million in economic assistance to South Korea, saying all wartime compensation issues were settled. However, historical issues including forced labor and sexual abuse of Korean women during the war have disrupted ties over the decades, while South Korea has become an Asian power and a rival to Japan, and while Tokyo, especially during the late Prime Minister Shinzo Abe 's rule, has promoted revisionist views. Japan has since offered atonement money twice for the so-called 'comfort women,' an earlier semi-private fund and a second one unilaterally dissolved by former South Korean President Moon Jae-in's liberal government. Things have improved in recent years, and Japan is watching to see whether Lee sticks with his conservative predecessor's more conciliatory diplomacy or returns to the confrontation that marked previous liberal governments. Cooperation between the two sides is 'more essential than ever' to overcome their shared problems such as worsening regional security and Trump's tariffs that have shaken free trade systems, Japan's largest-circulation newspaper Yomiuri said in a recent editorial. At a 60th anniversary reception in Tokyo, Ishiba said that he sees 'a bright future' in the relationship. He expressed hope also for cooperation in 'common challenges' such as low birth rates and declining populations. ___ Kim reported from Seoul, South Korea.
