A bizarre saga involving a painting attributed to Lee Ufan and Kim Keon-hee, the wife of South Korea’s impeached and jailed former president Yoon Suk-yeol, may be drawing to a close.
Kim Sang-min, a former chief prosecutor, had previously been accused of purchasing Lee’s From Point No. 800298 in 2023 for around 140 million won (about $100,000) and then gifting the work to the former first lady in exchange for political favors. On Monday, he was acquitted of violating the Improper Solicitation and Graft Act. He was, however, found guilty of illegally receiving political funds and sentenced to six months in prison, suspended for one year, and ordered to forfeit approximately 41 million won (about $28,000).
The special prosecution team leading the case had sought a six-year prison sentence. Kim and his defense have long denied the allegations, asserting that he acted only as an “intermediary” between the seller and Kim Keon-hee’s brother-in-law. The court said the special prosecution’s evidence was “insufficient to conclusively prove beyond a reasonable doubt” that Kim purchased the painting or gave it to Kim Keon-hee. Without a purchase agreement or other documentation, the evidence was deemed circumstantial.
“At the time of the painting’s purchase, Kim’s bank account balance was minus 290 million won, making it implausible for him to afford the 140 million won cash payment,” the court said, according to Chosun Ilbo, South Korea’s newspaper of record. “Conversely, Kim Jin-woo had significant liquidity, and the painting was found at his mother-in-law’s residence, leaving room to question whether he was the actual buyer.”
The special prosecution team also put an art broker identified as Mr. Kang on the stand. While he testified that he overheard the former prosecutor say, “Kim Keon-hee liked the painting,” the court concluded that Kang changed his testimony multiple times and lacked credibility.
In a statement following the ruling, Kim’s legal team said, “We are grateful that the court made a fair and impartial judgment based on constitutional and criminal procedural principles.” Regarding the acquittal on the Improper Solicitation Act charge, they added, “The special prosecution’s failure to prove the painting’s origin and delivery is clear. The discrediting of Mr. Kang’s testimony in court reveals the prosecution’s confirmation bias.”
Kim’s lawyers, however, disputed the conviction for illegally receiving political funds, arguing that Kim had borrowed the money in question and intended to repay it. They said Kim plans to appeal the conviction.
