Prosecutors seek 2-year prison term for Lee Hwa-young in jury trial; defense calls case 'political revenge'

Prosecutors on Thursday sought a two-year prison sentence and a fine of 5 million won ($3,280) against Lee Hwa-young, former vice governor for peace affairs of Gyeonggi Province, who faces charges including perjury related to an alleged "drinking party at a prosecutor's office" and violations of the Political Funds Act.

Lee's legal team urged the jury to acquit her, denouncing the prosecution's investigation as "state violence" and "fabrication" aimed at targeting political rival Lee Jae Myung.

The citizen participation trial — unprecedented in being held over 10 consecutive nights — concluded closing arguments from both sides and moved into jury deliberations Thursday, with a first-instance verdict expected to follow.

At the 10th and final day of the trial, heard by the 11th Criminal Division of Suwon District Court (presiding judge Song Byeong-hun), prosecutors sought two years in prison on charges including perjury under the Act on Testimony and Appraisal Before the National Assembly, violations of the Local Finance Act, and abuse of authority. A separate fine of 5 million won was sought on the Political Funds Act violation charge.

Prosecutors said they treated as a mitigating factor the fact that the charges in this case stand in a "post-verdict concurrent offense" relationship — meaning offenses for which a final judgment has not yet been rendered — with a separate case in which Lee had already received a first-instance ruling on charges including violations of the Foreign Exchange Transactions Act.

During closing arguments that ran about three hours beginning at 9:30 a.m., prosecutors used vivid analogies to persuade the jury.

On the central perjury charge — the alleged drinking party at a prosecutor's office — prosecutors argued that the probability of smuggling alcohol past the strict security of a detention center and a prosecutor's office, consuming it without a trace and returning undetected, was "less than 0.4 percent." They called it "an impossible fiction, like threading eight needles at once."

On the abuse-of-authority charge related to the provision of saplings to North Korea, prosecutors said sending slow-growing ornamental garden trees packaged as reforestation supplies amounted to "a waste of taxpayer money and a bid to curry favor with the North Korean elite." On the charge of splitting political donations to evade reporting requirements, they said it "defies common sense that someone would donate tens of millions of won without making it known."

In afternoon closing arguments, Lee's defense team lashed out at the indictment as "cutting off the tail to cover up an unlawful investigation."

The defense presented a recorded transcript of a prison visit between former chairman Ahn Bu-su and his family, in which Ahn was heard saying that prosecutors "called all of our side — Ssangbangwool — to the prosecutor's office for a meeting." The defense called this clear evidence of a "testimony seminar" in which co-defendants were gathered to coordinate their statements.

One defense attorney pulled two plastic bottles of soju from his bag in open court. He said he had bought them at lunch after hearing prosecutors' morning arguments and had passed through the courthouse security checkpoint with them. "If even a court with strict security can be breached like this," he said, "why is it impossible to bring alcohol into a prosecutor's office?"

Lee, who the previous day had denounced prosecutors' pressure tactics and parallel investigations as "state violence on the level of terrorism," repeated her grievances in her final statement Thursday.

"This case began because the Yoon Suk Yeol government wanted to go after Lee Jae Myung, then a presidential candidate and a political rival," she said, adding that prosecutors had "conducted a reckless, fabricated investigation to claim credit."

She also made a personal appeal to the jury. "I have only been able to see the two grandchildren born during my imprisonment through iron bars," she said. "Please look at this case with common sense and let me go home to take care of my family."

Shortly after closing arguments concluded, at around 6 p.m. Thursday, the court selected seven principal jurors and five alternate jurors by random draw. The jury was set to begin deliberating on guilt and sentencing in a sequestered room after dinner.

Should a majority of jurors accept the defense's argument that the prosecution abused its authority to bring charges, the court could dismiss the case outright — regardless of the merits of the underlying charges.

Given the breadth of the issues to be decided and the sharp divide between the two sides, the final verdict is not expected until the early hours of Friday.