13.5 Billion KRW Second Sports Town Faces 'Administrative Procedure Loophole'... Former Geochang Governor Inmo Koo's Responsibility Questioned

Was Construction Carried Out Without Implementation Plan Approval or Public Notice?
County Official Admits, "There Was No Official Announcement"

Completion Ceremony on May 22, Followed by Report of Procedural Issues to the Governor on the 27th... "Audit Was Ordered"

Facility Continued to Operate After Issue Was Recognized
Civic Group: "County Administration at the Time Must Clarify Scope of Management and Supervision Responsibility"

The controversy over the administrative procedures related to the Geochang Second Sports Town development project, which involved a total project cost of 13.5 billion KRW, is expanding into the issue of management and supervision responsibilities of former Geochang County Governor Inmo Koo, who was the highest-ranking official of the county government at the time.

In particular, a county official explained that the issue regarding the approval and official announcement of the implementation plan was reported to then-Governor Koo just five days after the completion ceremony for the Second Sports Town was held on May 22, 2025, specifically on May 27. This has shifted the core issue from "When did the administration become aware of the problem?" to "What actions were taken after the issue was recognized?"

[Photo by Geochang County] An overview of Geochang 2nd Sports Town, where a total project cost of 13.5 billion KRW was invested. As controversy over administrative procedures during the project promotion process arises, the question of whether Gu Inmo, the former Geochang County Governor and the highest official of the county government at the time, was responsible for management and supervision has emerged as a key issue. View of the 2nd Sports Town

Our investigation into the administrative procedures at the relevant Geochang County department revealed that, according to an official, "After reviewing the documents, we found that the application for implementation plan approval was submitted on March 28, 2023, and the documents were sent to the Urban Architecture Division at that time, but the request for opinions does not appear to have been circulated properly."

When asked whether the implementation plan approval and official announcement had, in fact, taken place, the official responded, "There was no official announcement."

Moreover, when questioned about the legal basis for carrying out the construction and executing the budget in the absence of such approvals or announcements, the official replied, "The basis is somewhat ambiguous," and admitted, "There is no legal basis."

The official further explained that they proceeded with the project under the assumption that the approval and official announcement had been completed, given that an application for implementation plan approval had already been submitted.

If a public project worth 13.5 billion KRW proceeded without fully verifying whether the necessary administrative procedures were properly completed, this would go beyond a simple paperwork omission, raising concerns about whether Geochang County's internal legal review, inter-departmental consultation, reporting and approval system, and oversight mechanisms functioned correctly.

The "Act on the Planning and Use of the National Territory" stipulates procedures regarding the implementation of urban and county planning facility projects, including approvals for implementation plans. However, in order to determine exactly how this regulation and any other licensing exemptions were applied in the case of the Second Sports Town, a comprehensive review of the original project documents is required.

Therefore, based solely on the information currently available, it is difficult to immediately define the entire Second Sports Town project as an "illegal construction." However, given that the county official confirmed there was no implementation plan approval or official announcement, Geochang County must clarify what legal or administrative grounds were used to proceed with the construction and spend a budget of 13.5 billion KRW at the time of groundbreaking. The controversy has intensified since the completion ceremony.

The county official stated in our interview, in relation to the issue with administrative procedures, "The records indicate that the issue was formally reported on May 27, 2025."

This means that the issue was reported to then-Governor Inmo Koo just five days after the completion ceremony for the Second Sports Town was held.

Regarding the actions former Governor Koo took after being informed, the official explained, "As far as I know, he instructed an audit at that time." The response also indicated that progress in supplementing the administrative procedures was reported on several occasions during the process.

This raises new issues regarding former Governor Koo’s responsibility for management and supervision from this point onward.

If former Governor Koo was genuinely unaware of the issue with approval and announcement before May 27, the question of his responsibility at the time of groundbreaking would require further verification of approval documents and the reporting system in place at that time.

However, if the issue was officially reported to the highest county official on May 27, then his response after that date needs to be examined separately.

To determine responsibility, it is crucial to review whether the county government at the time examined the legal grounds for continued facility operation, received legal counsel, considered suspending operations, and what corrective actions were taken according to the findings of the audit, if any.

In fact, the operation of the Second Sports Town continued even after the issue was recognized.

When we asked the official what legal basis there was for continuing to operate the facility after becoming aware that the administrative procedures were not complete, the official replied, "I'm not sure about that," and was unable to provide specific grounds during the interview.

This is why it is difficult to regard this matter as merely an administrative oversight by a responsible official. Local civic groups are also calling for clarification of the scope of management and supervision responsibilities held by the former Governor.

A representative from a civic group stated, "Initially, it may be explained that the department in charge mistakenly believed all administrative procedures had been completed, but the situation changes after the problem was reported to the governor." The representative emphasized, "For a public project of this scale and budget, the county administration should explain what legal review and corrective measures were taken and on what basis the operation of the facility continued after the problem was reported."

The representative further asserted, "Simply ordering an audit does not absolve the responsibility for management and supervision," and argued, "The outcome of the audit, the subsequent corrective actions, and who made the decision to continue operating the facility, along with their rationale, should all be made public."

However, based on the facts confirmed so far, there is not enough evidence to conclude that former Governor Inmo Koo was aware of the omission in administrative procedures and directly ordered unlawful construction or facility operation.

Photo by Soong Kyung Choi. A Geochang County official is explaining to our reporters the administrative procedures such as approval and announcement of the implementation plan for the Second Sports Town Project and the progress of the project.

The specific scope of former Governor Koo’s responsibility can only be determined by confirming the contents of the acknowledgement report dated May 27, 2025, the instructions he gave at the time, the audit results, legal reviews, and how the status of facility operation and supplementation of administrative procedures was reported to the governor thereafter.

Ultimately, this controversy boils down to two issues: "Why were the administrative procedures omitted?" and "What did the county administration do after recognizing the problem?"

Geochang County needs to resolve the controversy by disclosing documents such as the implementation plan approval application dated March 28, 2023, materials on inter-departmental consultations, records related to permits at the time of groundbreaking, the governor’s acknowledgment report dated May 27, 2025, audit instructions and results, records of legal consultations, and the internal review and approval materials related to the supplementation of administrative procedures and continued facility operation.

It is difficult to resolve the controversy over missing administrative procedures in a project involving the enormous sum of 13.5 billion KRW with the mere explanation of, "We thought the approval and announcement had been completed."

Furthermore, if facility operation continued even after the problem was reported to the top county official, it must also be clarified what legal or administrative judgment was used to continue operations, and who made that decision.

There are also calls for former Governor Inmo Koo to explain what information he received at the time, what reports and subsequent measures were taken after ordering the audit.

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