0
On August 11, the special counsel investigating Kim Keon-hee’s alleged “NATO necklace” bribe searches the headquarters of Seohui Construction in Yangjae-dong, Seocho District, Seoul. / Graphics by Park Jong-kyu, Source: Yonhap News

The special counsel investigating Kim Keon-hee is reportedly considering applying bribery charges — rather than influence-peddling — over allegations she received a 60 million won Van Cleef & Arpels necklace. Influence-peddling carries a maximum sentence of five years in prison, while bribery can lead to more than 10 years depending on the amount involved. Legal experts say that if former President Yoon Suk Yeol is booked as a bribery suspect and Kim is named as an accomplice, bribery charges could be viable.

On August 11, the special counsel team led by Min Joong-ki secured both the genuine necklace and a voluntary confession from construction firm Seohui Construction, confirming the gift was given to Kim in June 2022 ahead of her NATO trip. Investigators are probing whether the gift was linked to the appointment of former prosecutor Park Sung-geun — son-in-law of Seohui chairman Lee Bong-gwan — as chief of staff to the prime minister. Former Prime Minister Han Duck-soo has stated that the appointment reflected the former president’s wishes.

If Kim is found to have brokered a public appointment in exchange for valuables, influence-peddling charges could apply. Bribery, however, is generally reserved for public officials and cannot typically be applied to a public official’s spouse — unless Yoon is charged as the main offender and Kim as an accomplice, which could increase her potential sentence.

In the Park Geun-hye–Choi Seo-won scandal, Yoon, then part of the special counsel team, successfully applied bribery charges to Choi using the “economic community” theory despite her not being a public official. Lawyers say it would be even easier to establish such a link between spouses. “The key question is whether giving the necklace to Kim can be considered the same as giving it to Yoon,” said attorney Kwak Jun-ho, noting that a similar precedent exists even without cohabitation.

With Kim now detained in a 6.56-square-meter single cell at Seoul Southern Detention Center and reportedly refusing meals, investigators could obtain further testimony from her or associates. Legal experts note that even if she returned the necklace, the act of receiving it with intent to keep it constitutes bribery under Supreme Court precedent. While the return may be considered in sentencing, it does not negate the charge.