Lee Ufan Painting at Center of South Korean Bribery Case Is Ruled Authentic
A Seoul court has turned a political corruption case into an art-world dispute, ruling that a painting by Lee Ufan was genuine and worth far more than the defense claimed. The decision helped secure the conviction of former senior prosecutor Kim Sang-min, who was accused of using the work to win political favor from former first lady Kim Keon Hee.
The Seoul High Court this week overturned Kim’s earlier acquittal and found him guilty of violating South Korea’s anti-corruption law. Prosecutors said he gave Kim Keon Hee the work, *From Dots (No. 800298)*, in exchange for support as he sought a nomination from the conservative People Power Party ahead of the 2024 parliamentary elections.
The painting was valued at 140 million won, or about $95,500. Kim’s defense argued that it was a forgery worth less than 1 million won, roughly $680, a claim that would have weakened the bribery case by recasting the gift as a low-value object rather than a high-value benefit. The appellate judges rejected that argument after presenting the artwork in court and consulting experts, concluding that it was authentic and properly valued.
The ruling also revived testimony from an art dealer whose account had been discounted in the lower court. Appellate judges said the witness remained credible overall, including his claim that Kim said the former first lady “received the painting and liked it.”
In its written decision, the court said Kim had “severely damaged public trust” by allegedly giving a high-value artwork to the president’s wife while preparing his own political run. Judges also upheld a separate finding that he received about 42 million won, or about $28,000, in political support tied to vehicle leases and insurance payments during his campaign preparations.
Kim received a two-year prison sentence, suspended for three years, on the bribery charge, along with a separate one-year suspended sentence for illegal political donations. After the ruling, he said he was “deeply disappointed” and would consult his legal team about a possible appeal.
The case leaves Lee Ufan’s work in an unusual position: not only as an artwork under scrutiny, but as evidence in a corruption trial where authenticity became inseparable from political intent.
