Samsung Heir Appeal

[Anchor Lead]

The prosecution is seeking a 12-year sentence for Samsung heir-apparent Lee Jae-yong in his appeals trial. His defense team appealed the five-year sentence Lee received in a lower court for his part in the bribery scandal that lead to the impeachment of ex-president Park Geun-hye. As we look ahead to the appellate court’s decision this February, here’s how the appeal played out.

[Pkg]

The special prosecutor's team once again sought a 12-year prison term for Samsung heir apparent Lee Jae-yong. It's the same sentence pursued during the initial trial. The prosecutors applied the same five charges against Lee. They include the bribes that he provided to Park Geun-hye and Choi Soon-sil. Just as before, special counsel Park Young-soo and his team personally attended the final appeals trial. The prosecutors said that Lee offered bribes to the former president in return for helping him to inherit his father's business, and that it clearly demonstrated close ties between the government and business. The prosecutors also said that Lee's claim that his sponsorship of equestrian training and various foundations as representations of Samsung's social philanthropy was an insult to the spirit of social philanthropy. Samsung blasted the prosecutors by saying that the special counsel's team had severely distorted the case. The two sides squared off in court 17 times over the past four months. The most contentious issue was implicit solicitation. The two sides clashed over whether Samsung's financial support, in hopes of Lee Jae-yong receiving help in inheriting the Samsung empire, constituted bribery. In the initial trial, this issue played a decisive role in determining the court's verdict for Lee. The special prosecutor's team modified the petition of appeal four times in order to prove implicit solicitation. In his final testimony, Lee said that he was not so foolish to believe that he would succeed had the president helped him if he asked her. He added that he was to blame for everything and would take legal and moral responsibility. The appellate court will issue its verdict on February 5 at 2 p.m.