How 'Oppagate' puts Kim Seung-won’s Justice Ministry nomination and Korea’s legal overhaul under pressure

[EXPLAINER]  

Kim Seung-won is poised to become President Lee Jae Myung’s second justice minister at a time when the public is expressing concerns about legal reforms pursued by his administration.

However, Kim might find answering questions about the controversies surrounding him to be the most pressing priority.

Since Lee nominated Kim on Aug. 30, allegations have emerged that he became involved in efforts to expedite approval of a clinical trial for a Covid-19 treatment — a controversy that has been mockingly dubbed “Oppagate.”

Oppa is a Korean honorific women commonly use when addressing an older man with whom they have a close relationship. The controversy took its name from text messages in which a female broker surnamed Yang referred to Kim as “Seung-won oppa.”

Conservative independent Rep. Han Dong-hoon coined the term “Democratic Party's (DP) Oppagate,” combining “oppa” with the suffix “-gate,” which is commonly used to denote a political scandal, in reference to Watergate.

The nominee faces allegations that Yang asked Kim to use his influence as a lawmaker to pressure Kim Kang-lip, then head of the Ministry of Food and Drug Safety (MFDS), to expedite approval of a clinical trial for a Covid-19 treatment developed by biotech company Genencell. Yang reportedly referred to Kim as “oppa” repeatedly in text messages, suggesting that the two had a close relationship.

The main opposition People Power Party (PPP) has called on President Lee to withdraw Kim’s nomination. Kim said Tuesday that he would “explain everything” at his confirmation hearing, scheduled for Tuesday.

Kim’s alleged involvement in the clinical trial approval process is not the only issue that has drawn scrutiny. Prosecutors investigated him in connection with the case but deferred indictment in December 2024, rather than bringing charges.

The allegations date back to his first term as a DP lawmaker.

What exactly is Kim accused of?  

Kim won his first term as a DP lawmaker in April 2020 after working as a judge and attorney from 2002 to 2017 and serving as senior secretary for political affairs under the liberal Moon Jae-in administration from 2018 to 2019.

The allegations stem from Kim's alleged use of his political influence in 2021 to help expedite approval of a clinical trial for a Covid-19 treatment developed by Genencell, a company founded by Kang Se-chan, a professor at Kyung Hee University.

Kang and broker Yang had reportedly known each other for a long time. Kang told Yang on Oct. 6, 2021, that he was concerned that the clinical trial would not be approved by Oct. 12.

Two days later, Yang sent Kim text messages asking whether he could ask the MFDS to expedite the approval. On Oct. 12, Kim told Yang that he had asked then-MFDS chief Kim Kang-lip to speed up the process, according to phone recordings released Sunday by independent Rep. Han.

Han, a former justice minister and former leader of the PPP, became a lawmaker in a parliamentary by-election in June. He released the recordings as evidence of Yang’s efforts to use her political connections to expedite the approval.

In an Oct. 8, 2021 recording — also released by Han — between Yang and Choi Jae-sung, then senior presidential secretary for political affairs at the Blue House, Yang said she wanted the approval to move faster but that a change in the person in charge had caused a delay.

Han argued that Yang was seeking to use her connection to a Blue House official to expedite the clinical approval process.

Kang, meanwhile, sold Genencell shares for 6.3 billion won ($4.7 million) on Oct. 19, 2021, to biotech-focused investment firm Sejong Medical. He reportedly encouraged Yang the following day to buy shares in Sejong Medical.

Kim, meanwhile, was allegedly promised a 5 million won political donation from Genencell.

The MFDS approved the clinical trial on Oct. 26, 2021. Yang was allegedly promised financial compensation in exchange for helping Kang obtain the approval.

In December 2024, the Seoul Western District Court sentenced Kang to three years in prison, suspended for five years, on charges including violations of the Financial Investment Services and Capital Markets Act and obstruction of official duties by fraudulent means.

Prosecutors also investigated Kim’s alleged role in the case but deferred indictment in December 2024, citing a lack of evidence of a direct financial exchange and saying it was difficult to conclude that the alleged solicitation was illegal.

Why is the opposition bloc pressing Kim?  

The prosecutors’ decision to defer indictment did not result in Kim's conviction, but the PPP argues that it does not clear him of wrongdoing.

Prosecutors decided not to indict Kim after determining that he had not received the 5 million won donation and taking into account his lack of a prior record of a similar offense. Prosecutors nevertheless concluded that he had agreed to receive the donation, according to documents cited by the opposition.

The Seoul Western District Court also found during Kang’s trial that Kim had helped Yang by pressing the MFDS chief to speed up the clinical trial approval. The PPP has cited that finding as evidence of Kim’s involvement, although Kim was not convicted in the case.

“Kim’s camp has denied the allegations, pointing to the previous decision to defer indictment,” PPP senior floor spokesperson Choi Soo-jin said in a statement Tuesday. “But that decision does not mean a court found him not guilty. The police should reinvestigate the allegations of lobbying for the new treatment fairly and without political pressure and get to the bottom of what happened.”  

Han also questioned in a statement released on Sept. 4 why prosecutors chose to defer indictment even though they had prepared a document stating that they would indict Kim and seek an eight-month prison sentence. Han shared details from the document in his statement.

“On behalf of the people, I ask who stopped prosecutors from indicting Kim Seung-won and seeking a prison sentence, and why,” Han said.

What has Kim said about the allegations?  

After prosecutors deferred indictment in 2024, Kim filed a constitutional complaint in May 2025.

“Starting in 2021, prosecutors conducted an intensive three-year investigation involving more than 10 prosecutors, but ultimately decided not to indict me,” Kim told reporters on Sept. 3. “I believe the case should have been dismissed for lack of wrongdoing, but the decision to defer indictment based on certain actions was unfair.”

Kim’s constitutional complaint is pending before the Constitutional Court. If the court upholds his complaint, prosecutors could be required to reconsider their decision to defer indictment.

As for why he contacted the MFDS chief, Kim said Monday that he was merely asking him to “expedite the delayed process.”

He also denied using his political influence to persuade prosecutors to defer indictment.

“How could I, a mere first-term DP lawmaker, have pressured prosecutors into giving me a deferred prosecution?” he said.

Regarding the recording of Yang and Choi from Oct. 8, 2021, Kim’s side said Thursday that the version released by Han omitted key context. According to Kim’s side, Yang also said the MFDS had told her that “the numbers came out really well” and that she “just wanted to know why” the approval had been delayed.

Kim’s side argued that the omitted remarks made Yang’s comments appear to be a request to expedite the approval, rather than an inquiry into why an otherwise favorable review had been delayed.

What tasks will Kim face if he takes office as justice minister? 

Addressing the allegations will be an immediate priority, but broader challenges await Kim if he takes the helm of the Justice Ministry.

Kim will oversee major legal reforms pursued by the Lee administration, including the abolition of the prosecution service and the removal of prosecutors’ investigative powers.  

Under a bill passed by the DP-led National Assembly and promulgated by Lee, the prosecution service will be disbanded on Oct. 2 and replaced by two separate agencies: a new office responsible for indictments under the Ministry of Justice and the Serious Crimes Investigation Agency under the Ministry of the Interior and Safety.

Kim will face pressure to ensure that the new agencies operate independently of the ruling party, amid opposition concerns that the reform could create a command-driven investigative system vulnerable to political influence by the DP.

The abolition of the prosecution service will coincide with the removal of prosecutors’ investigative powers.

Prosecutors working under the new agencies will not be able to conduct supplementary investigations themselves. Instead, they will be able to request that police conduct additional investigative work. Police will then have two months to complete the supplementary investigation after receiving a prosecutor’s request.

The changes have raised concerns that the police could become too powerful, as well as questions about their investigative capacity following a series of recent controversies involving officers.

Lee has also acknowledged concerns about the reform and said that the government needs to take follow-up measures. Kim will therefore face pressure to establish effective oversight of the police once he takes office.

What has Kim said about dropping charges against the president?

The bill ending prosecutors’ investigative powers also expands the grounds for dismissing indictments, including cases in which prosecutors bring charges based on illegal investigations or abuse their authority in deciding whether to prosecute.

The PPP has argued that the provisions could allow prosecutors to drop charges against Lee, who is facing five criminal trials that were suspended shortly after he took office in June 2025.

Kim called in January for prosecutors to drop the charges against Lee. But on Sept. 3, he said he had no “authority to withdraw charges and no intention of directing the matter through the prosecutor general.”

Kim is scheduled to appear at a parliamentary confirmation hearing on Tuesday. Ministerial nominees must undergo a parliamentary confirmation process, but the president can appoint them even if the National Assembly withholds its consent.

BY PAIK JI-HWAN [[email protected]]