Go to Contents Go to Navigation

Main points of Constitutional Court's ruling against Park

All Headlines 12:59 March 10, 2017

SEOUL, March 10 (Yonhap) -- The following are the main points of the Constitutional Court's Friday adjudication on the Dec. 9 parliament impeachment that removed Park Geun-hye from the presidential office. The court unanimously decided for Park's removal.

<On Allowing Choi Soon-sil to interfere with state affairs and abuse of power>

-- Most confidential documents, including ones on personnel administration data, Cabinet meetings, Park's overseas trips and her meeting with the U.S. secretary of state, were conveyed to Park's confidante Choi Soon-sil between around January 2013 and April 2016 via Park's secretary Jeong Ho-seong.

-- Choi meddled in presidential affairs by giving opinions on the documents, modifying their content and rescheduling Park's itineraries.

-- Choi recommended candidates for government posts, with some of them helping Choi's personal interests.

-- At Choi's request, Park instructed former presidential economic adviser Ahn Jong-beom to ask Hyundai Automotive Group to hire KD Corp., an auto parts company, as its subcontractor.

-- Park also ordered Ahn to take 48.6 billion won (US$41.99 million) and 28.8 billion won of donations from conglomerates to set up the Mir and K-Sport foundations, respectively.

-- However, Park and Choi made all decisions in relation to the management of the foundations while excluding businesses, which funded the foundations.

-- Choi took personal profits from Mir via the ad company Play Ground, which she established just before the launch of the foundation.

-- Park held a one-on-one meeting with the head of Lotte Group over providing money to build sports facilities in Hanam, east of Seoul. Lotte later provided 7 billion won.

<On whether Park and Choi's above-mentioned acts violate the Constitution and law>

-- Park infringed upon the Constitution, Public Servants Law and Public Servants' Ethics as she abused her status and power for Choi's interests, which constitutes an unfair performance of official duty.

-- Park infringed upon the freedom of corporate management, as well as corporate property rights, by directly and indirectly providing help in Choi's pursuit of interest.

-- Via instructions or neglect, Park breached an obligation to keep secrets under the Public Servants Law by leaking lots of documents that belong to the confidential category.

Send Feedback
How can we improve?
Thanks for your feedback!