Liberals vow judicial overhaul after court acquits Seoul mayor
A South Korean high court acquitted Seoul Mayor Oh Se-hoon of charges related to violations of the Political Funds Act, prompting immediate reactions from left-leaning political parties. Leaders of the ruling Democratic Party of Korea described the verdict as legally questionable and indicative of a politically motivated judicial system, vowing to accelerate efforts toward comprehensive judicial reform. While the party’s spokesperson stated that the ruling would fuel public distrust in the judiciary, he explicitly ruled out an immediate move to impeach Supreme Court Chief Justice Jo Hee-de, noting that further review was necessary. In contrast, the minor liberal Rebuilding Korea Party characterized the acquittal as evidence of a “counterattack” by a politicized judiciary against ongoing reform efforts. This faction urged the broader liberal coalition to proceed swiftly with an impeachment motion against Chief Justice Jo, arguing that the current judicial leadership remains too lenient toward conservative figures involved in previous political controversies.
Seoul Mayor Oh Se-hoon received an acquittal on Friday from the Seoul High Court in a political funds violation case, prompting immediate backlash from the ruling Democratic Party of Korea. The court overturned a first-instance conviction that had sentenced Oh to a fine of 10 million won. In response, Democratic Party leaders vowed to pursue judicial reform and questioned the integrity of the Supreme Court, while the opposition People Power Party defended the verdict as a restoration of legal order. The Seoul High Court’s Criminal Division 7, presided over by Judge Gu Hui-geun, ruled that the evidence presented by the special prosecutor was insufficient to prove guilt beyond reasonable doubt. The core of the defense rested on the lack of credibility attributed to the testimony of pollster Myung Tae-gyun. The appellate court determined that Myung’s statements contained speculation and exaggeration that contradicted other witness accounts and objective records. Consequently, the judges applied criminal law principles favoring the defendant when proof is not absolute. Democratic Party Chair Kim Min-seok described the verdict as difficult to accept legally and logically. Speaking to reporters outside a photojournalists’ sports day at the National Assembly on Saturday, Kim stated that the party would proceed steadily with its planned measures, which include a parliamentary investigation into the judiciary. When asked specifically about calls within his party to impeach Supreme Court Chief Justice Jo Hee-dae, Kim confirmed that the party would coordinate internally to advance these discussions. He noted that the ruling had fueled significant public suspicion toward the judicial branch. Lee Ju-hee, the Democratic Party’s floor leader, issued a briefing criticizing the appellate panel’s judgment. She argued that the court ignored multiple pieces of objective evidence in favor of vague presumptions. Lee highlighted that Oh’s supporter, Kim Han-jung, paid 33 million won to Myung’s side during the period of the 2021 Seoul mayoral by-election. Although the appellate court acknowledged the transfer of money, it rejected the claim that Oh directly requested this illegal payment. Lee contended that the court assumed Oh would not engage in such politically dangerous behavior based on common sense, thereby dismissing contradictory documentary records. The party demanded that the Supreme Court correct what it termed errors in legal interpretation and evidentiary assessment. Minor liberal parties joined the criticism. Cho Kuk, founder of the Rebuilding Korea Party, labeled the verdict a counterattack by a politicized judiciary. His party had recently introduced a motion to impeach Chief Justice Jo, arguing that the current judicial leadership has shown leniency toward conservative figures involved in the 2024 martial law declaration. Shin Chang-sik, chair of the Rebuilding Korea Party, urged the liberal bloc to act swiftly, stating that dissolving the National Court Administration and removing Jo were necessary steps to ensure fairness. In contrast, the People Power Party celebrated the acquittal. Senior Spokesperson Park Sung-hoon criticized the ruling coalition for attempting to intimidate the judiciary. He argued that labeling unfavorable decisions as political judgments undermines the separation of powers. Park questioned the qualifications of the liberal parties to lecture on the rule of law, referencing their past stances on prosecutorial independence and criminal cases involving their own leaders. He asserted that the judiciary must remain independent from political calculations. People Power Party Chair Jang Dong-hyeok urged the special prosecutor’s office not to appeal the decision to the Supreme Court. Citing remarks by President Lee Jae-myung regarding the prosecution of innocent individuals, Jang suggested that continuing appeals would be an attempt to evade responsibility. Another party spokesperson, Park Choong-kwon, described the verdict as a major relief, accusing the special counsel of destabilizing Seoul’s governance through overreaching prosecution. Mayor Oh addressed the controversy on Saturday at the same National Assembly venue. He called for restraint from the ruling party, warning against the notion that elected power supersedes the three branches of government. Oh emphasized that respecting judicial authority is fundamental to maintaining the separation of powers. He stated that he would focus on municipal administration amidst the approaching general elections. Oh also used the platform to criticize the government’s real estate policies. He pointed to rising prices in sales, jeonse deposits, and monthly rents, describing them as a triple surge. He argued that current strategies emphasizing owner-occupancy obligations fail to address market realities. Oh pledged to propose alternative policy solutions to alleviate burdens on residents. The legal dispute traces back to allegations that Oh accepted indirect benefits related to polling costs. The special prosecutor alleged that Oh received ten sets of polling results from Myung before the 2021 election and arranged for Kim Han-jung to pay 33 million won to Myung’s camp. While the first instance court found some exaggeration in Myung’s account, it still convicted Oh based on corroborating circumstances. The appellate court, however, placed greater weight on the inconsistencies in Myung’s narrative. With the special prosecutor indicating an intent to appeal, the final determination rests with the Supreme Court. The outcome carries significant implications for upcoming national elections and the ongoing debate over judicial independence in South Korea.
5 reports
The HankyorehIndependentProgressiveFactual: no official source document/info detectedObjective 90
Democratic Party of Korea leader Kim Min-seok stated on October 24 that his party intends to proceed step by step with efforts to impeach Chief Justice Cho Hee-dae, including the possibility of a national investigation. When asked about growing internal calls for impeachment following the appellate acquittal of Seoul Mayor Oh Se-hoon, Kim said the party is coordinating various options within the National Assembly. The previous day, Kim had criticized the appellate court’s decision to acquit Mayor Oh, describing the ruling as difficult to understand both legally and logically. The comments were made during a press gathering after a photojournalists’ sports event at the National Assembly.
Bias read (Progressive): The article focuses exclusively on statements by the leader of the Democratic Party of Korea, a center-left political party, regarding the pursuit of judicial impeachment. It highlights the party’s strategic approach and includes direct quotes criticizing a court decision as illogical, which aligns,
Why factuality: no official source document/info detected
Why objectivity (90): Highly neutral. It simply reports the politician's response to a question without adding commentary, judgment, or framing that suggests the reporter agrees or disagrees with the policy.
The HankyorehIndependentConservativeFactual: no official source document/info detectedObjective 85
Seoul Mayor Oh Se-hoon called for restraint after the Democratic Party of Korea officially began discussing the impeachment of Chief Justice Cho Hee-dae. Speaking at a sports event on May 24, one day after receiving an acquittal in his appeal trial for alleged violations of the Political Funds Act, Oh criticized the ruling party for acting as if elected power supersedes the three branches of government. He argued that such remarks undermine judicial independence and the separation of powers. Additionally, Oh criticized the current administration’s real estate policies, stating that they overemphasize owner-occupancy requirements while failing to address rising transaction, jeonse, and monthly rent prices. He pledged to continue proposing alternative policies to alleviate the burden on ordinary citizens.
Bias read (Conservative): The article frames the story through the perspective of Seoul Mayor Oh Se-hoon, a prominent figure associated with the conservative People Power Party. It highlights his criticism of the ruling Democratic Party’s push for the impeachment of the Chief Justice, describing their actions as 'lawless' ('
Why factuality: no official source document/info detected
Why objectivity (85): Neutral reporting of a political figure's speech. It presents Oh's criticism of the ruling party and the government objectively, allowing the reader to assess the validity of his claims without the author interjecting.
The Korea HeraldIndependentProgressiveFactual: no official source document/info detectedObjective 85
A South Korean high court acquitted Seoul Mayor Oh Se-hoon of charges related to violations of the Political Funds Act, prompting immediate reactions from left-leaning political parties. Leaders of the ruling Democratic Party of Korea described the verdict as legally questionable and indicative of a politically motivated judicial system, vowing to accelerate efforts toward comprehensive judicial reform. While the party’s spokesperson stated that the ruling would fuel public distrust in the judiciary, he explicitly ruled out an immediate move to impeach Supreme Court Chief Justice Jo Hee-de, noting that further review was necessary. In contrast, the minor liberal Rebuilding Korea Party characterized the acquittal as evidence of a “counterattack” by a politicized judiciary against ongoing reform efforts. This faction urged the broader liberal coalition to proceed swiftly with an impeachment motion against Chief Justice Jo, arguing that the current judicial leadership remains too lenient toward conservative figures involved in previous political controversies.
Bias read (Progressive): The article frames the event primarily through the lens of left-wing political actors who view the judicial system as hostile to their interests. By centering quotes from Democratic Party leaders who describe the ruling as illegitimate and calling for structural changes to the courts, the piece ampl
Why factuality: no official source document/info detected
Why objectivity (85): Maintains a standard journalistic tone. While it highlights the Liberal/LDP reaction (as per the headline), it presents their statements neutrally without injecting editorial bias or emotional adjectives beyond those used by the speakers themselves.
The HankyorehIndependentProgressiveFactual: no official source document/info detectedObjective 70
The Seoul High Court ruled that Seoul Mayor Oh Se-hoon was not guilty of violating political funding laws in his second trial. The ruling party, the Democratic Party of Korea, criticized the decision, arguing that the court relied on vague presumptions rather than objective evidence such as payments made by Oh’s supporters. Party leader Kim Min-seok stated that the party would proceed step-by-step with measures against Chief Justice Cho Hee-dae, including potential impeachment proceedings. In response, the opposition People Power Party condemned the ruling party’s actions as an attempt to undermine judicial independence and the separation of powers. They accused the ruling coalition of labeling favorable rulings as 'judicial justice' while dismissing unfavorable ones as 'political judgments.'
Bias read (Progressive): The article frames the story primarily through the lens of the ruling Democratic Party's criticism of the court and their push for the impeachment of the Chief Justice. While it includes quotes from the opposition People Power Party defending the judiciary, the narrative structure emphasizes the 'r范
Why factuality: no official source document/info detected
Why objectivity (70): Balanced in structure by presenting both sides' reactions, but the inclusion of the PFP’s harsh rhetoric ('criminal president', 'Choe Kuk') reflects the heated nature of the debate rather than editorializing. However, the title uses strong emotive language ('Mukbulinjeom'), slightly lowering neutral
The HankyorehIndependentProgressiveFactual: no official source document/info detectedObjective 40
Seoul Mayor Oh Se-hoon was acquitted by the Seoul High Court in his appeal trial regarding allegations that he violated political funding laws during the 2021 mayoral election. The appellate court rejected the testimony of pollster Myung Tae-gyun, deeming it unreliable due to inconsistencies and exaggerations, despite evidence showing that donor Kim Han-jong transferred significant sums to Myung. The editorial argues that the court improperly dismissed objective circumstantial evidence, including the timing of payments and communications between Oh’s campaign and Myung, which suggested potential coordination. It warns that such a ruling could make prosecuting illegal political funding more difficult in the future, as these crimes often lack direct physical evidence. With the special prosecutor planning to appeal to the Supreme Court, the piece calls for a final verdict that fully resolves public doubts, noting the case’s significant impact on upcoming presidential elections.
Bias read (Progressive): The article is an opinion piece ([사설]) that explicitly criticizes the appellate court's acquittal of a conservative politician (Oh Se-hoon). It frames the legal decision as flawed for ignoring 'objective circumstances' and favors a stricter interpretation of political funding laws. This aligns with左
Why factuality: no official source document/info detected
Why objectivity (40): This is an opinion piece (Editorial/Saseul). It explicitly takes a stance, arguing that the appellate court failed in its duty and questioning the logic of the acquittal. It is not neutral; it advocates for a specific view of the judicial failure.
How each side covered it
The same event, grouped by the political lean of the outlets covering it.
progressive
center
conservative
★
How each side covered it
Support independent, bias-aware news and unlock the social pulse, community voting, and every other Supporter feature.
KR
