Translation result
More than one-third of prospective candidates registered in Gyeonggi Province for the June 3 local elections have criminal records, raising serious concerns about two central qualities voters expect of public officials: integrity and respect for the law. The list includes convictions for offenses such as drunk driving, fraud and embezzlement—crimes that call into question these candidates’ fitness to manage local government affairs.
An exhaustive review by the Incheon Ilbo of criminal records posted on the Central Election Commission website as of March 15 found that 750 people had registered as prospective candidates across 31 cities and counties in Gyeonggi Province. They are competing in 334 electoral districts for 578 seats, including mayors, provincial assembly members and municipal councilors. Of those 750 registrants, 262 people—34.9%—have criminal records.
▲ Habitual drunk driving and traffic offenses top the list, posing threats to public safety
By offense type, traffic-related crimes (including drunk driving) accounted for the largest share at 45%, representing the most direct threat to citizen safety. Violent crimes and economic offenses—such as fraud, embezzlement and breach of trust—followed. The remainder consisted of violations of the Public Official Election Act, assembly laws and the Building Act.
The dataset includes repeat offenders with up to six convictions as well as candidates with criminal records within the past two years. Observers say that to elect leaders capable of safeguarding grassroots democracy, voters must rigorously scrutinize candidates’ morals, and political parties must adopt much stricter nomination standards.
Among ordinary criminal records that undermine an official’s qualifications, the most common were violations of the Road Traffic Act (drunk and unlicensed driving) and breaches of the Act on Special Cases Concerning the Handling of Traffic Accidents—offenses that raise questions about candidates’ adherence to legal and ethical standards.
In Goyang, both mayoral hopefuls and municipal council candidates were found to have convictions for offenses that jeopardize public safety. One mayoral hopeful in Osan has two prior drunk-driving convictions, and some council candidates have records for both drunk and unlicensed driving. In Bucheon, a council candidate was fined after a drunk-driving incident that caused injury. These safety-related offenses appeared across party lines.
▲ Moral damage: economic crimes and recent criminal incidents also present
Economic offenses such as fraud and embezzlement—which make candidates unsuitable to oversee public finances—are also prominent, as are recently recorded criminal incidents. A candidate in Siheung has six convictions, including fraud and embezzlement. A mayoral hopeful in Bucheon was fined for intentionally damaging property. Candidates punished for violating the Building Act have registered in Osan, and a prospective candidate in Yongin appears on the list for forging public and private documents.
Records of violations of the Public Official Election Act are notable too. In Goyang, two mayoral hopefuls and one council candidate have past convictions for election-law breaches, raising doubts about their ability to manage fair elections.
▲ Key question: how high will parties set the vetting bar for candidates with everyday crimes?
Public sentiment favors raising the nomination threshold for everyday crimes such as drunk driving and corruption, and parties have reportedly tightened vetting procedures. The key issue will be how stringent those thresholds become. As parties begin formal candidate screenings, criminal records are likely to be treated as a crucial variable, with weight varying by offense type.
Voters should now examine not only candidates’ résumés but also whether offenses are repeat offenses and the seriousness of the crimes.
A local political insider said, \”Unlike the days when past political incidents were treated like badges of honor, today’s voters see everyday crimes—drunk driving, property crimes and election-law violations—as serious matters directly tied to an official’s integrity. Because these leaders will be responsible for local democracy, parties’ nomination filters and voters’ strict moral scrutiny are more necessary than ever.\”
The Central Election Commission’s disclosure of criminal records is required under election law to guarantee voters’ right to know, to help vet public officials’ morality and to provide fair election information. These disclosures serve as a basic safeguard to help voters decide whom to elect.
/Regional Desk = Reporter Dong-hwa Lee ahwa21@incheonilbo.com
Most Commented