Kim Hee-young Spending Claim Is False, Choi Tae-won Side Says ... Appeals Prosecutors’ Non-Indictment Decision
TECHWORLD ·
✦ AI Summary
Choi Tae-won's side said the actual amount of living expenses used for Kim Hee-young was about KRW 2 billion as of the time of the claim.
Choi's side said the claim that more than KRW 100 billion was used was false, presented results from an investigation into financial transaction records, and said it had explained the matter to the court handling the property division case.
Choi's legal representatives also said they had appealed the prosecutors’ decision not to indict in a defamation case involving attorney Lee Sang-won, who represents Roh So-young.
The legal representatives for SK Group Chairman Choi Tae-won said that, in connection with claims made in a media interview by attorney Lee Sang-won, who represents Roh So-young, director of the Art Center Nabi, that Choi spent more than KRW 100 billion on Kim Hee-young, chair of the T&C Foundation, the actual amount spent on living expenses was about KRW 2 billion as of the time of the claim. Citing an investigation into financial transaction records, Choi's side said the claim of "KRW 100 billion spent" was false.
Choi's side said the matter concerned living expenses spent by Choi and Kim Hee-young. It also reiterated that the amount spent on living expenses by Choi and Kim Hee-young was about KRW 2 billion as of the time of the claim.
Choi's side said it had explained these details in detail to the court handling the property division case. It also claimed that both Roh So-young and Lee Sang-won were aware of the details.
Choi's legal representatives said they have appealed the prosecutors’ decision not to indict in a defamation case involving a lawyer for Roh So-young's side at the Art Center Nabi. In a statement released on the 15th, Choi's side announced that it had filed the appeal against the non-indictment decision.
Choi's side said Lee had exaggerated the relevant amount by adding together spending for different purposes from Choi's accounts and even including amounts paid to Roh herself. Choi's side said figures inflated to more than 50 times the actual amount were spread in the media.
There are three key points in the appeal released by Choi's side. The first claim is that spending unrelated to Kim Hee-young was included.
There is a KB Kookmin Bank account opened during Choi's time in custody, and total spending from that account was KRW 20.4 billion. The investigation found that the account had been opened for Roh So-young.
The investigation also found that a large portion of the account spending was payments to Roh So-young. However, Choi's side claimed that even spending from that account was counted as costs related to Kim Hee-young.
The second claim in the appeal is that contributions and donations made for public-interest foundations were included. Examples of the recipients cited were ChildFund Korea, the Community Chest of Korea, and the T&C Foundation.
Choi's side said those donations were used for public-interest projects such as emergency relief, scholarships, education, and welfare. It added that treating contributions and donations for public purposes as gifts to a specific individual distorts the facts.
Choi's side said the issue centers on the claim that assets held solely in Choi's name were included, explaining that houses and artworks under Choi's name are personal assets, but that those assets are included in the property division case with Roh So-young. It said Roh's side is seeking a division of those assets in court on the grounds that they are marital property.
By contrast, Choi's side pointed out that Roh's side has been telling the media that those assets were gifts to Kim Hee-young. It said the claim that the assets are marital property and the claim that they were gifted to Kim Hee-young cannot be reconciled.
Choi's side argued that Lee Sang-won is in a position to verify the relevant facts as counsel in the property division lawsuit. It said Lee carried out a public-relations campaign aimed at influencing the ongoing trial, inflated the numbers, appeared repeatedly on broadcasts, and spread false information. It also said he disclosed materials from a closed trial and personal financial information protected under the Act on Special Cases Concerning Procedure, etc. of Family Relations.
Choi's side emphasized that the purpose of the prosecutors’ decision not to indict was that there was insufficient evidence to prove awareness of false information. It also drew a line, saying the non-indictment decision contains no finding as to whether the figures that were spread were true.
The speaker, while raising arguments related to the prosecutors’ decision not to indict, pointed out that the decision is being circulated as if it had recognized the truth of the claims, said such distortions are being repeated, and said they had decided to appeal the non-indictment decision and would seek a new determination through procedures prescribed by law.
Source: TECHWORLD · Park Gyu-chan
Original: https://www.epnc.co.kr/news/articleView.html?idxno=406930
References
This article was produced with the help of an automated content generation algorithm.
Source: TECHWORLD
View originalThis article was summarized and organized by BizCrush based on the original article from TECHWORLD. For exact quotations and full details, please refer to the original article.