On April 16 and 17, 2026, a political storm erupted in Seoul’s National Assembly, as lawmakers, prosecutors, and key figures in the Daejang-dong development scandal clashed over explosive new allegations of evidence manipulation, political targeting, and cover-up. The controversy, which has simmered for years, spilled into public view as rival parties and witnesses laid out competing narratives about the prosecution’s handling of the high-profile case involving President Lee Jae-myung and his former aides.
At the heart of the uproar are dueling claims about two rounds of official investigations—one conducted in 2021, the other initiated after the rise of the Yoon Seok-yeol administration. According to Newsis, members of the ruling coalition’s special committee convened a press conference on April 17, 2026, accusing the second Daejang-dong investigation team, led by figures close to Yoon, of overturning what they described as essentially concluded results. They charged that prosecutors had forcibly implicated President Lee and former chief aide Jung Jin-sang as accomplices, dramatically expanding the scope of the breach of trust allegations to paint the affair as a corruption scandal involving thousands of billions of won. Their purpose, the lawmakers argued, was to “remove President Lee.”
“The so-called Yoon Seok-yeol faction, which led the second investigation team, completely overturned the results of an investigation that was in fact already concluded,” the special committee members declared, according to Newsis. They further alleged that the team “exaggerated the scope of the breach of trust to mislead public opinion into believing it was a massive corruption case.”
The controversy only deepened during a heated National Assembly hearing on April 16. Nam Wook, a developer at the center of the Daejang-dong scandal, delivered bombshell testimony. As reported by Yonhap and Mindle News, Nam recounted that during his 2022 detention and interrogation, prosecutor Jeong Il-kwon told him, “Our goal is one: Lee Jae-myung. Go down and think about it.” Nam claimed this statement revealed the true intent behind the investigation: targeting the president for removal. He also testified that prosecutors labeled Lee as a “suspect” in seizure records during an October 2022 search of Yoo Dong-gyu’s mistress, even though Lee had not been formally indicted at the time.
Nam’s testimony didn’t stop there. He described intense pressure from the second investigation team, who repeatedly asked, “Isn’t it true that Lee Jae-myung ordered all this?” and pressed him to implicate the president. Nam said, “Whatever the situation, Lee Jae-myung would have been prosecuted. There was always a target.” He also alleged that Yoo Dong-gyu, another key figure, began making false statements under prosecutorial pressure, which were then accepted in court as evidence without proper verification.
Prosecutor Jeong Il-kwon, for his part, flatly denied these claims. “I only told him to speak truthfully and factually, without any prejudice,” Jeong insisted during the hearing, as reported by Yonhap. “I never said our goal was Lee Jae-myung.” Former Prosecutor General Lee Won-seok also sought to distance himself from the political firestorm, stating he had never communicated with then-President Yoon Seok-yeol about the case and emphasizing that the investigation was merely a continuation of work begun under the previous Moon Jae-in administration.
Yet, the controversy over the prosecution’s conduct only intensified. Democratic Party and allied lawmakers condemned what they called a politically motivated campaign against President Lee. “The intention to target and remove Lee Jae-myung is clear in the prosecution’s documents,” said Democratic Party lawmaker Park Sung-joon. “Even though Lee wasn’t formally a suspect, the records show the prosecution had already decided on its target.” Another lawmaker, Yang Bu-nam, added, “There was no evidence or testimony of illicit funds flowing to Lee by October 2022. The second investigation team’s only goal was to indict Lee.”
In a dramatic twist, Baek Gwang-hyun, a former Democratic Party member and YouTuber, held a separate press conference at the National Assembly on April 16, 2026, releasing new audio recordings between Nam Wook and Yoo Dong-gyu. According to The Public, Baek explained that the tapes were meant to expose “the concealment, poor investigation, and manipulation of testimonies” by the first investigation team in 2021. In the recording, Nam Wook is heard telling Yoo, “I said a lot, but the prosecutor kept erasing it from the record. If it didn’t fit their scenario, it was deleted.” Yoo agreed, saying, “It didn’t fit the script they wrote.”
Baek argued that the first investigation, led by prosecutors Kim Tae-hoon and Yoo Kyung-pil, had deliberately suppressed evidence implicating Lee Jae-myung. He accused the second investigation, under the Yoon administration, of going the opposite direction—pressuring witnesses to reverse their statements and targeting Lee and his former aide Jung Jin-sang for prosecution. “The first investigation was marred by concealment, and the second reversed those findings to target Lee politically,” Baek asserted.
The recordings also included Nam Wook confirming collusion among Lee Jae-myung, Jung Jin-sang, Kim Yong, and Kim Man-bae—a claim that directly contradicted his earlier statements, which he said were given under prosecutorial pressure. Baek emphasized the need to “reveal the full truth behind the case” and called out political interference in the ongoing investigation.
Meanwhile, Democratic Party lawmaker Kim Dong-a pointed out that over ten years of objective evidence and recordings never mentioned “Lee Jae-myung” or “Seongnam Mayor.” He argued that the only evidence presented by the second investigation was based on coerced testimonies from Yoo Dong-gyu and Nam Wook. “The so-called evidence is nothing but manipulated statements obtained through pressure,” Kim stated, according to Newsis.
The political stakes escalated further when it was revealed that prosecutor Lee Ju-yong, who had investigated Nam Wook, attempted suicide after being summoned as a witness to the special committee hearing. Lawmakers expressed concern but said they were unaware of Lee’s health or circumstances prior to the incident.
As the hearings unfolded, opposition lawmakers seized on the controversy to criticize the prosecution’s conduct and demand accountability. They argued that the investigation’s trajectory—first, an alleged cover-up, then a reversal and political targeting—demonstrated a lack of prosecutorial independence and a dangerous entanglement of law enforcement with partisan agendas.
For their part, prosecutors and their supporters maintained that the investigation was rooted in factual inquiry, not political vendetta. They pointed out that the Daejang-dong scandal, which centered on a controversial urban development project during Lee’s tenure as Seongnam mayor, had already led to convictions and exposed serious irregularities. The question, they argued, should be about the facts of the case, not the motives of those investigating it.
Yet, as new recordings, conflicting testimonies, and public accusations continue to emerge, the Daejang-dong affair remains a lightning rod for South Korea’s deep political divides. With both sides accusing the other of manipulation and cover-up, and the public left to sift through a torrent of claims and counterclaims, the demand for transparency and accountability has never been more urgent.
The outcome of this bitter struggle will have far-reaching implications—not only for President Lee Jae-myung and his administration, but for the integrity of South Korea’s justice system and the credibility of its democratic institutions.