Board of Audit and Inspection tells Seoul council a resolution alone is not enough to launch probe

The Board of Audit and Inspection has told the Seoul Metropolitan Council that a council resolution alone is not sufficient to open a public-interest audit, it has been learned.

The board responded after the Seoul Metropolitan Council passed a resolution on June 24 urging an audit into the permitting and donation-in-lieu procedures surrounding the Haengdang 7 zone redevelopment project in Seongdong-gu.

The council had forwarded the resolution to the board after it cleared the full session. A council official said the board communicated by phone that a resolution alone could not initiate an audit and suggested other avenues, such as filing a formal public-interest audit request.

Under Article 3 of the board's public-interest audit request processing rules, only four categories of parties may file such a request: at least 300 citizens aged 18 or older; a registered nonprofit civic organization with at least 300 members pursuing the public interest; the head of the institution subject to audit; or a local council, but only for matters concerning the affairs of its own local government. Under those rules, the Seoul Metropolitan Council has no standing to request an audit of Seongdong-gu.

However, Seoul Metropolitan Government may audit Seongdong-gu under Article 184 of the Local Autonomy Act. Hwang Cheol-gyu, the People Power Party lawmaker on the Seoul Metropolitan Council who led the resolution, is reportedly considering asking the Seoul Metropolitan Government to file a public-interest audit request.

In the resolution, the council said an audit was needed to examine the circumstances under which Seongdong-gu reversed course at the project's completion stage and declined to accept the facility as a donation in lieu, despite indications that the project had proceeded on the premise that the Agissi-dang shrine would be donated. The council said the audit should also assess the legal basis for that decision, the appropriateness of the decision-making process, and whether the principle of protecting legitimate expectations and other legal and administrative standards had been violated.

The council added that if the project had been carried out on the premise that association members' assets would be used to build, relocate and compensate for the Agissi-dang facility as a donation in lieu, but the donation ultimately did not go through, "this raises a serious question about the very premise on which the project was pursued."

The allegations surrounding the Agissi-dang shrine emerged during the June 3 local elections. The central claim is that Jeong Won-o, then the Democratic Party of Korea's candidate for Seoul mayor, pushed through the Haengdang 7 redevelopment project during his tenure as Seongdong-gu district chief and required the construction of a 4.8 billion won ($3.38 million) shamanic shrine through a donation-in-lieu arrangement — only to later refuse to take ownership of the completed building and demand a cash payment instead, causing losses to the redevelopment association.

Yoon Hee-sook, a former People Power Party lawmaker who worked on Oh Se-hoon's campaign for the June 3 local elections, alleged on April 7 that "Jeong Won-o's Seongdong-gu had the Haengdang 7 redevelopment association build a 4.8 billion won Agissi-dang shrine through a donation-in-lieu arrangement, and is now refusing to take ownership of the shrine, causing losses to the association."

Seongdong-gu rebuffed the allegations in a statement on May 22, calling them groundless. "Matters related to private and property rights — including ownership, compensation and whether a donation in lieu is made — fall within the domain that must be resolved through negotiations between the redevelopment association and the parties involved, and are not matters Seongdong-gu can intervene in or decide," the district said. "We express serious regret that content inconsistent with the facts continues to be circulated."