Former Daegu High Prosecutors’ Office Chief Yoon Gapkeun Loses Lawsuit Against JTBC Over ‘Kim Hakui Involvement’ Report

"Freedom of the Press Cannot Be Easily Restricted"

Yoon Gapkeun, former chief of the Daegu High Prosecutors' Office, lost his appeal in a damages lawsuit he filed against JTBC for reporting suspicions that he was involved in the Kim Hakui case.

Yoon Gapkeun, former Chief Prosecutor of Daegu High Prosecutors' Office. Photo by Jin-Hyung Kang

According to legal sources on September 2, the Civil Division 13-1 of the Seoul High Court (Presiding Judges Baek Gangjin, Lee Kyuhong, and Hwang Jingu) ruled against Yoon in the appeal on August 28, in his damages lawsuit against JTBC, then-anchor Sohn Sukhee, and the reporters. Previously, the first-instance court had ordered the defendants to jointly compensate Yoon 70 million won.

JTBC reported in March 2019 that Yoon Joongchun, a construction contractor suspected of providing sexual favors to former Vice Minister of Justice Kim Hakui and others, acknowledged his acquaintance with Yoon Gapkeun and testified to having played golf with him during the Supreme Prosecutors’ Fact-Finding Team’s investigation.

In response, Yoon Gapkeun claimed that "I have never even met Yoon Joongchun" and in the same year filed a damages lawsuit against JTBC and others, seeking compensation of over 300 million won.

The court of first instance stated, "The report in question exceeded the scope of legitimate press activity involving monitoring, criticism, and checks on a public official, and instead constituted a malicious or severely reckless attack that unfairly damaged the plaintiff's social reputation. This constitutes an unlawful act." The court did not find the statements made by Yoon Joongchun’s driver to the police and the testimony given to the Supreme Prosecutors’ Fact-Finding Team—cited by JTBC as grounds for their reports—reliable.

However, the appellate court determined that, although there were questionable aspects in the reporting process and some inappropriate conduct was involved, there was insufficient evidence to recognize the falsehood of the report itself. Therefore, it was difficult to accept liability for defamation.

The court noted, "It appears that JTBC mainly relied on data unilaterally provided by investigative agencies and delivered the details of the investigation in a one-sided manner," adding, "There may be doubts as to whether sufficient and balanced fact-checking efforts, as required of journalists during the reporting process, were actually undertaken."

Nonetheless, the court also stated, "On the other hand, this report was directly related to the press carrying out its fundamental role of monitoring and criticizing public officials or the public sector. Considering the degree of public interest in the report and its relation to press freedom, the court cannot easily restrict the freedom of press on the grounds of certain problems with the reporting process or conduct."

This content was produced with the assistance of AI translation services.