Judge Ji Gui-yeon indicted over W4.09m entertainment tab at Cheongdam bar

Ji Gui-yeon, a senior judge at the Seoul Northern District Court, has been indicted over allegations that she received entertainment at a bar — a case that drew intense public scrutiny after photographs of her at the venue circulated last year. The Corruption Investigation Office for High-ranking Officials, known as the CIO, determined that Ji violated the Act on Prohibition of Improper Solicitation and Provision of Money and Valuables, commonly called the Anti-Graft Act. However, the CIO declined to charge her with bribery, saying it could not establish that the entertainment was provided in exchange for favorable treatment in court proceedings.

The CIO's Third Investigation Division indicted Ji on Friday without seeking her detention on charges of violating the Anti-Graft Act. The office also notified the court of its investigation findings and requested disciplinary action against her.

According to the CIO, Ji allegedly received entertainment worth 4.09 million won ($3,010) in August 2023, when lawyers identified as A and B paid the tab at a reservation-only bar in Cheongdam-dong, Gangnam-gu, Seoul. The Anti-Graft Act prohibits public officials from receiving money or valuables exceeding 1 million won from the same person on a single occasion, regardless of whether it is related to their duties.

The Democratic Party of Korea first raised the allegations in May last year, claiming Ji had been entertained at a room salon — a type of upscale hostess bar — and releasing photographs showing her seated alongside two others at what appeared to be a Gangnam bar. At the time, Ji was presiding over the Seoul Central District Court's Criminal Division 25, which was hearing the first-instance trial of former President Yoon Suk Yeol on insurrection charges stemming from the Dec. 3 emergency martial law declaration. The case had already been mired in controversy after the court took the unusual step of revoking Yoon's pretrial detention, and the Democratic Party kept up its attacks on Ji throughout the proceedings.

As the photograph controversy spread, civic groups and others filed complaints against Ji in May last year on charges of bribery and Anti-Graft Act violations. The CIO subsequently opened a formal investigation, elevating the matter from an allegation to a criminal probe.

The CIO obtained related materials from aides to Assembly members who had raised the allegations in July of that year, and executed a communications warrant against Ji. Investigators subsequently questioned whistleblowers, related parties and those who had provided the entertainment. In November last year, the office secured a search and seizure warrant targeting Ji and obtained records of her taxi use and credit card transactions.

Working from the published photographs and other evidence, the CIO said it identified two occasions on which Ji and her companions gathered at the same bar. Lawyer A's payment records at the venue showed six transactions in total, of which two matched Ji's taxi travel records and movements.

Ji denied all charges during a suspect interview in May this year. The CIO said she "denied the entirety of the alleged facts, stating she had no recollection of the incidents."

The CIO concluded, however, that evidence was insufficient to establish that the entertainment had been provided in exchange for favorable rulings. Although investigators examined whether a quid pro quo existed — noting that the lawyers who paid were professionally connected to the judiciary — they found no record of those lawyers having taken on cases before Ji's division. The office declined to indict her on bribery charges, saying "a mere vague and abstract expectation is not enough to establish a quid pro quo relationship."

The CIO said it confirmed that in 2013, while Ji was serving on a civil collegiate division at the Suwon District Court, she had overturned a first-instance ruling against lawyer A's client and issued a ruling in A's favor on appeal. However, the office determined that the roughly 10-year gap between that ruling and the alleged entertainment, combined with the value of the litigation, made it difficult to conclude that the hospitality was provided as a reward for past judicial conduct.

In addition, the CIO declined to bring Anti-Graft Act charges over a separate incident in September 2024, in which about 4.16 million won was allegedly spent at a gathering attended by Ji and four others, saying the evidence was insufficient to sustain such charges.

A CIO official said the office would "continue to rigorously investigate corruption cases involving high-ranking public officials and contribute to upholding the integrity of public service," adding that it would "spare no effort in maintaining the prosecution going forward."