The Board of Audit and Inspection released the audit report on 'Seoul's Jung-gu Facility Management Corporation's operational misuse' on the 8th. It stated that the corporation purchased toilet paper through a private contract at a cost of 3.78 million won higher than necessary. This incident came to light after the Jung-gu Council requested an audit, leading the Board to conduct the investigation for 17 months.
Experts noted, "It is problematic to pass issues that local governments and councils should resolve on their own to a national agency like the Board of Audit and Inspection." They explained that this incident arose from political conflicts and tensions between the Jung-gu Office and the Jung-gu Council.
◇Board of Audit and Inspection mobilizes for 17 months over the incident of purchasing toilet paper at 3.78 million won more
The Jung-gu Facility Management Corporation manages public facilities such as daycare centers, care centers, community centers, sports centers, and public parking lots in Jung-gu, Seoul. Its annual budget amounts to 42 billion won.
In November 2023, the Jung-gu Council requested a public audit of the corporation from the Board of Audit and Inspection. The Board deployed five audit personnel for a 17-day audit starting January 25 last year. The audit results were finalized on the 27th of last month through a resolution by the Audit Committee. It took a total of 17 months.
The Board's audit targeted the issue of toilet paper purchases for restrooms managed by the corporation. It was found that Kwon Hyog-woo, the chairperson of the Jung-gu Facility Management Corporation, recommended a specific company to Head of Team A, who was trying to contract toilet paper on an annual basis in January 2023. It was reported that she advised to contract with a manufacturing facility for products for those with severe disabilities located in Busan, where her long-time friend B was in charge of sales.
The practical staff of the corporation first learned that a standard business for the disabled in Seoul could supply toilet paper for 49.96 million won annually, but the company recommended by Kwon charged 53.74 million won. Ultimately, the Board concluded that the corporation ended up purchasing the toilet paper for 3.78 million won more by contracting with this company through a private contract.
The Board also pointed out a violation of the Anti-Corruption Act regarding the purchase of toilet paper. B, who provided the toilet paper, treated Kwon and other corporate officials to three meals in January to March 2023, saying, "Since the employees have worked hard, I'll treat them to a meal." However, during the two meals in January and March, the cost per person was less than 30,000 won, which is the limit that can generally be provided to public officials under the Anti-Corruption Act at that time. In February of the same year, the cost per person exceeded the limit at 56,600 won.
C, a former official of the Board of Audit and Inspection, said, "Though local government agencies are audit subjects of the Board, this incident does not warrant such a lengthy audit of 17 months due to its lack of gravity," adding, "This matter should have been resolved at the local government level."
The recent audit report released by the Board of Audit and Inspection covers: ▲ the status of the Saemangeum World Scout Jamboree preparations ▲ the illegal two-person structure of the Korea Communications Commission and the process of appointing directors for public broadcasting ▲ the operational status of policy funds (focusing on bad loans of the Korea Development Bank) ▲ the hiring and personnel management practices of the National Election Commission. The Board should be focused on investigating national key policies and fund execution.
◇District head and some councilors at odds, sending the matter to the Board of Audit and Inspection… Budget processing conflicts for two consecutive years
According to a related source, the background of these events includes conflicts between ruling and opposition councilors within the Jung-gu Council. Kim Gil-seong, the Jung-gu mayor who took office in July 2022, belongs to the People Power Party, while the Jung-gu Council, which began its term at the same time, initially had a majority with five members from the People Power Party out of nine councilors.
However, in selecting the council speaker, councilors from the People Power Party, including Kwi Gi-young and So Jae-kwon, were in opposition. Kwi joined hands with four Democratic Party councilors and was elected as the speaker. In response, the Seoul branch of the People Power Party expelled Kwi.
Subsequently, the council became effectively a minority versus majority, with independent Speaker Kwi and Democratic Party councilors taking control. Then the council began to have various conflicts with the mayor's office. The council significantly cut the budget submitted by the Jung-gu Office for 2023 and also reduced the 2024 budget proposal. Mayor Kim Gil-seong stated that fundamental project budgets, such as waste treatment and parking management, were being cut, calling it "unreasonable tyranny."
The audit of the corporation by the Board of Audit and Inspection also occurred in this context. When opposition members of the council attempted to conduct administrative checks, asserting that "the corporation is spending taxpayer money frivolously," Mayor Kim responded with an exercise of his veto power. Consequently, the opposition requested an audit from the Board, stating that "it is unlikely to rely on internal audit bodies."
In response, Choi Jin-hyuk, a professor at Chungnam National University’s Department of Urban and Local Governance (former president of the Korean Association for Local Government Studies), stated, "Local self-governance means solving local issues through self-responsibility." He emphasized that if problems arise, adjustments should be made between the ruling and opposition parties within the framework of local self-governance. He added, "This incident demonstrates that many expenses were incurred and administrative power was wasted due to the failure to achieve that. It serves as a case for the argument against the efficacy of local self-governance."