‘Gangsters of interest’ and golf pro-police… Court “Honest Disposition Party”

‘Gangsters of interest’ and golf pro-police… Court “Honest Disposition Party”
‘Gangsters of interest’ and golf pro-police… Court “Honest Disposition Party”

A police official who was suspended for playing golf with an acquaintance designated as a ‘gangster of interest’ filed a lawsuit claiming that the disciplinary action was unfair, but the court did not accept it.

According to the legal community on the 25th, the 7th administrative division of the Seoul Administrative Court (Chief Judge Jeong Sang-gyu) ruled against the plaintiff in a lawsuit filed by Superintendent A of the Seoul Metropolitan Police Agency against the Commissioner for cancellation of suspension, etc.

Mr. A got to know Mr. B through an acquaintance’s introduction when he was working as a section chief around February 2020, before being promoted, and they stayed close. Around April of the following year, when Mr. B suggested that he play golf with two police officers he knew, Mr. A responded and played a round at a golf course in Yongin, Gyeonggi-do.

After finishing golf at the time, they moved to Yeongtong-gu, Suwon, and had a meal, and Mr. B paid 400,000 won for golf and meals for Mr. A.

In this regard, Mr. A was referred to the disciplinary committee in June of the same year and was suspended for two months and an additional disciplinary penalty of 802,250 won was imposed.

Mr. B was a ‘gangster of interest’ designated by the police, but the disciplinary committee determined that Mr. A violated the Improper Solicitation and Graft Act by accepting golf and meal expenses from someone related to his job.

The disciplinary committee also found that Mr. A, who had a private meeting in just a week, violated the service guidelines even though the police had notified the order to ‘cancel unnecessary and non-urgent meetings and dinners’ during the spread of Corona 19.

A protested against this and filed a lawsuit. Mr. A’s claim is that he cannot be regarded as accepting entertainment because he delivered 750,000 won in cash by collecting 250,000 won each with two acquaintances who were present on the day he played golf.

Mr. A emphasized that, unlike the ‘gangsters subject to management’, the gangsters of interest are simply objects to be watched with interest, and that even this was lifted by Mr. B in March 2021, before playing golf.

In addition, the management of organized violence is in charge of the criminal division of each local police agency, and at the time of meeting Mr. B, he worked in an unrelated department, so he protested that he could not acknowledge the relevance of his job.

Mr. A admitted that he had violated the service guidelines, but he also added that it was impossible to confirm because there were not frequent opportunities to access the police internal network to complete the training at the time. In other words, it is argued that the punishment was too excessive compared to the reason for the disciplinary action, and the disciplinary discretion was abused.

However, the court dismissed all of A’s claims.

Regarding Mr. A’s claim that the money was collected and delivered, the court judged that the statements of the attendees about the unit of currency do not match, and even if the money was actually raised, it is difficult to find the circumstances in which it was delivered to Mr. B.

The court also rejected Mr. A’s claim that he denied any relation to Mr. B’s job. Given that Mr. A, who was promoted to superintendent at the time of the incident, had a good chance of leading the investigation as a high-ranking police officer in the future, it was considered that there was not a small possibility that he would be involved with Mr. B, who had been involved in gang violence for about 20 years.

The judge ruled, “Considering that Mr. B maintained a close relationship with golf companions for a considerable period of time and made efforts such as making golf course reservations and calculating costs, it is reasonable to assume that the plaintiff and others expected influence in the police force and provided benefits.” .

He then acknowledged the legitimacy of the disciplinary action, saying, “The reason for the disciplinary action in this case is likely to undermine the public’s trust in the investigative agency and adversely affect the guarantee of fairness and objectivity in the investigation, so the degree of violation cannot be considered weak.”


  • sad imagesI’m so sad
  • angry imagesangry

share imageshare

Article featured imageArticle recommendation

Copyright ⓒ Donga Ilbo & donga.com

The article is in Korean

Tags: Gangsters interest golf propolice .. Court Honest Disposition Party

PREV Seosan Haemieupseong Festival, selected as one of the 100 K-culture tourism events… Established as Korea’s representative festival
NEXT Korea’s population problem in 2023 (1)