Judge at center of 'entertainment tab' allegations removed from courtroom duties

Ji Gwi-yeon, a senior judge at the Seoul Northern District Court who has been indicted on allegations of receiving entertainment at a hostess bar, has been removed from trial duties after being reassigned to a judicial research post.

According to legal sources, the Supreme Court's Court Administration Office issued an order Wednesday reassigning Ji to a judicial research position effective Friday. The assignment runs through Feb. 21 next year. The move is widely seen as a response to Ji's indictment last month by the Corruption Investigation Office for High-ranking Officials, known as the CIO. The judicial research post allows judges to study legal affairs domestically or abroad in lieu of presiding over trials.

The CIO's third investigation division, led by Director Lee Dae-hwan, indicted Ji without detention on charges of violating the Anti-Graft Act on Sept. 4.

According to the CIO, Ji is accused of receiving entertainment worth 4.09 million won ($3,020) in August 2023, when two lawyers — identified only 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 other benefits exceeding 1 million won from the same person on a single occasion, regardless of whether it is related to their duties. The CIO calculated Ji's share of the entertainment at approximately 1.36 million won, based on dividing the total bill among the three people present — Ji and the two lawyers.

Ji's defense attorney issued a statement on the day of the indictment saying the legal team could not conceal its bewilderment at what it called the CIO's overreach in establishing facts and applying the law, and called the indictment deeply regrettable.

The defense argued that even if Ji had remained at the gathering until the end, as the CIO alleged, the amount received from any single individual did not exceed 1 million won, meaning the legal elements of an Anti-Graft Act violation could not be established. The defense added that the two junior colleagues had each paid separately, at different times and with their own funds, and that treating the two as a single person was a clear departure from any reasonable reading of the law's text.

The Democratic Party of Korea alleged in May last year that Ji had received entertainment at a hostess bar with female staff, releasing a photo that appeared to show Ji seated alongside two others at a bar believed to be in Gangnam, Seoul.

At the time, Ji was presiding over the first-instance trial of former President Yoon Suk Yeol on insurrection charges at Seoul Central District Court's Criminal Division 25. The case, considered the central proceeding stemming from the Dec. 3 emergency martial law incident, was mired in controversy even before the full trial got underway — after the panel made the unusual decision to lift Yoon's detention while he was still in custody. The Democratic Party's attacks on Ji as presiding judge continued throughout the proceedings.

As the controversy over the photo spread, civic groups and others filed complaints against Ji in May last year on charges of bribery and Anti-Graft Act violations. The matter shifted from allegations to a formal investigation once the CIO opened a probe.