Appeals Court to Rule in Kim Keon Hee Jobs-for-Gifts Case

The Seoul High Court is scheduled to rule Tuesday afternoon on former first lady Kim Keon Hee’s appeal in a bribery case centered on expensive gifts and alleged favors involving public appointments.

Kim, the wife of former President Yoon Suk Yeol, was sentenced to seven years in prison by a lower court in June. That court found her guilty of accepting bribes for mediation, while Kim appealed the judgment and maintained that she was innocent. The special counsel team prosecuting the case has asked the appeals court to keep the seven-year sentence in place.

The case covers several alleged exchanges over a period beginning before Yoon took office and continuing into his presidency. Prosecutors charged Kim with receiving jewelry valued at more than 100 million won, or about $72,800, from the chairman of a construction company between March and May 2022. They alleged that the items were provided in return for Kim’s help securing a government position for the chairman’s son-in-law.

Kim was also charged over a gold turtle ornament received in April 2022 from Lee Bae-yong, who later headed the National Education Commission. Prosecutors argued that the ornament was connected to Lee’s appointment. Other items in the case included a Dior bag from a pastor in 2022 and a Vacheron Constantin watch from another businessperson in September of that year.

A separate allegation concerned a painting by prominent artist Lee Ufan that Kim allegedly received from a former prosecutor in February 2023. The prosecution said the work was given in exchange for assistance in obtaining a nomination for an election.

The gifts cited in the indictment were valued at approximately 300 million won in total. The lower court found Kim guilty on all counts, but the appellate proceeding gives the higher court the authority to uphold, reduce or overturn that judgment.

The ruling is scheduled for 2 p.m. It will determine whether the lower court’s findings and sentence survive Kim’s first appeal in this case. Any further challenge would move the dispute to the Supreme Court, which generally reviews questions of law rather than retrying the factual record.