Yeo "Excessive authority to accompany" vs Ya "accept special prosecutor"...a national inspection battle

■ Host: Anchor Kim Youngsoo Kim
■ Appearance: Lawyer Yeo Sang-won, political commentator Kim Sang-il

* The text below may differ from the actual broadcast content, so please check the broadcast for more accurate information. Please specify [YTN NewsON] when quoting.

[Anchor]
Let's start <Politics On> looking at the outside and inside of politics. Today, let's have a sharp analysis with lawyer Yeo Sang-won and political critic Kim Sang-il. Shall we look at the first keyword? Gan Dong-hoon and Kim Min-seok were the top members of the Democratic Party of Korea. CEO Han Dong-hoon continues to speak on the issue of Kim Gun-hee every day. In the Democratic Party of Korea, the word Gan Dong-hoon came out today. Why did this come up? Let's listen to the voices of the ruling and opposition parties.

[Anchor]
CEO Han Dong-hoon mentioned that he thinks Mrs. Kim needs to refrain from public behavior. In addition, the prosecution talked about the final disposition of Mrs. Kim in relation to the manipulation of Deutsche Motors' stock price. But why did Supreme Council member Kim Min-seok use the expression "Kan Dong-hoon" today?

[Kim Sang Il]
So, the other person will only criticize. Whether you're good or not. I think that's how I feel. This is what we call adversarial symbiosis. If hostile symbiosis occurs, ordinary people in the middle region will not benefit. They're the only ones who benefit from continuing to fight. This is because the people are forced to line up after various options disappear. What would you do then? If you choose this side without any hope or if you don't like this side, you have to choose the other side reflexively. Then people who fight while blaming each other on both sides continue to be winners. That's why Rep. Kim Min-seok is so aware of that. have considerable opportunistic thinking That's what I'm thinking.

[Anchor]
He described CEO Han Dong-hoon as an accomplice who has crushed the Deutsche investigation.

[Kim Sang Il]
There's a little excessive language in those things, but lawmaker Kim Min-seok shouldn't use the word Gan Dong-hoon. Because he was called Kim Min-sae when he was a tadpole and was ridiculed for his name. By the way, is it true that someone who was so ridiculed with a name is so ridiculed with someone else's name? If you think about that time, I don't have to do that. You can say it in a very gentle manner according to your position. Next, regarding Deutsche Motors, look back on whether it has made enough efforts to resolve public suspicions that it can do when it comes to justice minister. It's right to say this much, and I think if you say that you are an accomplice, that can only be seen as a political intention to stimulate emotions.

[Yeo Sangwon]
I'm so inappropriate to say I'm an accomplice now. Because this is deceiving the people. I think so. Because the Minister of Justice cannot direct the prosecutor on a particular case. The person who is well aware of that is based on the premise that CEO Han Dong-hoon can control the Deutsche Motors case of First Lady Kim Gun-hee when he was the Minister of Justice, lead the investigation, prosecute, and indict. But isn't there some people who remember that the president or the justice minister manipulated the prosecution during the dictatorship? It's taken advantage of that. And in the story of Gan Dong-hoon, isn't CEO Han Dong-hoon a former justice minister and a person with very strong self-esteem? It's like what I said before about Ahn Cheol Soo. Isn't this what CEO Han Dong-hoon wants to do now like prosecuting Kim Gun-hee? However, CEO Han Dong-hoon will not be able to say this only. So by encouraging them like this, they hurt their self-esteem. It seems that he is using the word Gan Dong-hoon in the political arena like this, as critic Kim Sang-il said earlier, hoping to push harder. That's what I think.

[Kim Sang Il]
I said that when it comes to expression, but our lawyer and I have a slightly different opinion on the content. Of course, I can't use the expression of accomplice, but I think I have to admit that I haven't made an effort as the Minister of Justice. Justice Minister Han Dong-hoon was very impressed with his inauguration speech. I really like it. What he said was that he would provide a support fence so that prosecutors could investigate to their fullest in order to realize living power and social justice. Then, for example, if there are many things that are not convincing to the public, they can speak rudely and exercise the right to command the investigation. Or you could do what you could by protecting it in other ways and preventing drafts from power so that you could investigate it very much. But it's fair to be pointed out for not doing those things properly, I personally think so.

[Yeo Sangwon]
I'll tell you briefly. Being under external pressure is the role of the Minister of Justice to prevent the president or those in power from manipulating the prosecution. It makes no sense that the Minister of Justice used the right to command the investigation on a specific case, as you mentioned earlier, to determine the outcome of the prosecutor's disposition and the outcome of the investigation. And sometimes there are stories of investigative command, but the investigative command is actually a system that was rarely invoked until Minister Choo Mi-ae. However, after Minister Choo Mi-ae came in, he collided with the president of Yoon Suk Yeol, and the problem of investigative command arose. So I don't think lawmaker Kim Min-seok's story is appropriate.

[Kim Sang Il]
I didn't generalize it, but I specifically told you the case of Mrs. Kim Gun-hee, so I think it's right to relate to the living power you're talking about. And I think it is possible to overuse the general authority of investigation and command for power that is alive like this.

[Anchor]
I've heard enough of your positions. Today, Kang Seung-gyu, a member of the People's Power, criticized representative Han Dong-hoon in a radio interview. How can the ruling party leader, who served as justice minister, ask the public to judge according to public sentiment? Kim Gun-hee said, "I don't know what she did so wrong that she became a victim of the opposition's demonic frame." Rep. Kang Seung-gyu was also in the presidential office.

[Yeo Sangwon]
However, he is a member of the National Assembly and a member of the National Assembly is a person who collects public opinion and reflects it in the state of affairs, but what representative Han Dong-hoon said is not to hold a public opinion trial. The prosecution does not have to decide on a conclusion unconditionally to suit the president's taste by understanding the will of the people, but to open everything up and make the conclusion properly. Public opinion should make those who are innocent guilty. I'm not telling you to copy this. And I don't know what this means, but I said I don't know what I did so wrong that I became a victim of the devil's frame, but of course, when I see the opposition's attack as the ruling party, I think it's excessive. The ruling party can fully think that there is a scene where Kim Gun-hee continues to focus on it rather than a policy confrontation and drags the president down, but considering the current atmosphere of public opinion, former Prime Minister Kim Jong-pil said that. The people are tigers. If the people think in that way, it's politicians who have an obligation to resolve it, but if they say they don't know what they did wrong, there's no clue to the solution at all.

[Anchor]
According to Han Dong-hoon's remarks yesterday, the prosecution expressed that the prosecution should produce results that the public can understand regarding the prosecution of Kim.

[Kim Sang Il]
So Chief Kang Seung-gyu already sets up under his own fear that it is a convincing result, prosecution. But in fact, non-prosecution can be a convincing result. What's that? The prosecution investigated hard with great fairness and sincerity. It makes the people feel this. Make it transparent. Then, wouldn't the people understand if the prosecution is not prosecuted through efforts enough to clear up the suspicions? So, setting up a conclusion in fear in advance according to one's position and talking about it contains only one's political interests, and it is really not qualified as a representative of the people to dismiss it as someone who asks for something only by emotion. That's what I think. Are the people talking about this emotionally? Are you doing a public opinion trial? It's not. Aren't the people saying that since there are issues, circumstances, and evidence that could lead to suspicion, we need to resolve them at this point because it's a living power? I think it is wrong to unilaterally insult the people as emotional citizens in this way.

[Yeo Sangwon]
Critic Kim Sang-il said well, but the content is important, but it is also important to show it to the people. However, last time, Kim Gun-hee was investigated somewhere during the Deutsche Motors case. At that time, President Lee Won-seok and these people came to the prosecution office to investigate, but the chief prosecutor of the Central District Prosecutors' Office did it in a similar place. I heard that no matter where you investigate, you can investigate it properly, but from the public's point of view, this is a special treatment. Isn't it against the fairness that President Yoon Suk Yeol said? If the results come out here, no matter how hard the prosecution worked on the investigation, the people will not believe it. So, I don't think it's that appropriate in light of the fairness of the procedure that Representative Kang Seung-gyu says in this way.

[Anchor]
Looking at the current trend within the general public power, close lawmakers say that it is actually better for the prosecution to indict Kim Gun-hee next week in connection with Deutsche Motors stock price manipulation, centered on close lawmakers. Pro-Yoon-gye lawmakers don't think so. What kind of decision do you think you'll make?

[Yeo Sangwon]
Looking at the current overall appearance, I think we will go toward non-prosecution. We're going to go to the prosecution and see if that's appropriate.

[Anchor]
Vice-President Shin Ji-ho said that the prosecution of Kim Gun-hee would reduce the burden of the special prosecution.

[Yeo Sangwon]
If the prosecution is not prosecuted, the opposition party is attacking the prosecution in all directions, as it is a special prosecutor and a standing special prosecutor. But if the prosecution is not prosecuting right or wrong, it is not appropriate for the people's demands.

[Anchor]
What do you expect?

[Kim Sang Il]
I think the prosecution will not prosecute. Because how was the appointment of the head of the Seoul Central District Prosecutors' Office done? This was done because former Prosecutor General Lee Won-seok showed his willingness to investigate in a way that the people could understand. There was a passing controversy regarding personnel appointments. Of course, I think we're going to go toward non-prosecution. The problem is that the prosecution continues to lose trust in the results of the investigation. Then, how can we not do the special prosecution? And in the future, there may be talks about leaving everything to the special prosecutor's office and creating a special prosecutor's office. So, I hope the prosecution will reflect on the value of their existence once again based on public sentiment in the people.

[Anchor]
I see. I'll ask critic Kim Sang-il this question right away. The Democratic Party of Korea is attacking Myung Tae-kyun every day. There are a lot of comments by Myung Taekyun. How much credibility do you have?

[Kim Sang Il]
At first, whenever I hear Myung Tae-kyun's remarks, I think he's a total fraud, but when I see those in power responding to it, there's something about this. It's like this.

[Anchor]
Whose response was it?

[Kim Sang Il]
The presidential office's response is the same. For example, if Myung Tae-kyun often gave advice and polls, and he did things like this and that, he specifically did this and that, and this is a bluff, but he has never met since he took power. It's also turning out to be a lie, and if you do this and investigate me, for example, you can be impeached or step down within a month. Nevertheless, the reaction to it was so angry when the opposition party criticized the president that there was no such thing as if he was going to eat it. Then, the ruling party has some authority and power, so why is Myung Tae-kyun more scared? The opposition party has authority and power, but it's not scary here at all, but it's trying to press it.

[Anchor]
You don't seem to respond because you're afraid of the president's office?

[Kim Sang Il]
That's how you act so that the people feel.

[Anchor]
How do you think we should have responded?

[Kim Sang Il]
I've already told you. If something like this happens, it's so ridiculous that it reminds me of Choi Soon-sil's manipulation of state affairs. How can that be so ridiculous? I'm like this, but that could be possible. I'm explaining it to you. You have to explain it so that there is no room for that. A person named Myung Tae-kyun is a person. And in the past, I don't know what could be misunderstood, but this part of what I'm talking about now is all a lie. With such a thing, I guarantee you that you will be able to explain it very neatly, and there should be a rule that says, "What kind of person is Myung Tae-kyun?"

[Anchor]
What do you think of lawyer Yeo Sangwon?

[Yeo Sangwon]
This is almost at the bottom of the civil affairs office. I should have responded to this after thoroughly investigating the conversation between Myung Tae-kyun, First Lady Kim Gun-hee, and President Yoon Suk Yeol, but I lost my cool because I was in a tight spot such as the Kim Gun-hee case and the Kim Dae-nam case, which was talked about a lot recently. That's what I think. Because, as you said just a moment ago, how many election brokers or don't you show up during an election because you're an expert? There could be enough of that. I'll help you with the election. But what did the president's office say? He has never contacted Myung Tae-kyun since the presidential election. It turned out to be a lie right away. as the transcript of the conversation was revealed I don't know if I'll ask Kim Gun-hee or the president or ask her aides what happened after that without investigating this, but don't you feel like the president's office is dithering now because it turns out to be a lie? He's going to step down to the point that Myung Tae-kyun won't say, impeachment. I don't know who this person really is, but the president's office can't even make an excuse even though he says very harsh words. In the end, this was the initial response, this was too hasty. After properly grasping the truth, I should have responded even if I was a little late, but after trying to make Myung Tae-kyun the wrong person too hastily, I think it has come to the point where I should have stopped him with a phlegm.

[Anchor]
But today, Na Kyung-won said on social media that if there was actually a conspiracy or expediency during the national convention, the truth should be clarified. I posted something. Rep. Na Kyung-won posted like that. How did you see it?

[Kim Sang Il]
What Na Kyung-won said to party leader Han Dong-hoon not long ago is that he is acting with Kim Dae-nam's case. That's what I said. If you apply that logic and look at that article, you're doing it. But why is that? In my own political interpretation, I think we should kill some of the issues of Kim Dae-nam's suggestion and raise the issue of Myung Tae-kyun. As a result, I think they think that they should hurt their rivals politically and somewhat and get out of the hit.

[Anchor]
Myung Tae-kyun said in various interviews that he did not know why Na Kyung-won failed the party leadership election, as if there was a conspiracy and expediency. Regarding that, Na Kyung-won posted a message to the same effect on social media, if there is an expedient, we should investigate it.

[Kim Sang Il]
That's what you're doing in your own logic. But I don't think that's the act. Because it's a public hall. It is a public party that should be based on the people, based on the public sentiment, and based on the public interest. Then, I think Na Kyung-won is right because if there is any suspicion in it, we should investigate all the things that can be resolved to the people and show them to the public. However, I'm saying that Kim Dae-nam's personal behavior does not look so beautiful in terms of the 180-degree behavior he shows in the past.

[Anchor]
Thank you. Let's move on to the next keyword. The next keyword is floor leader Choo Kyung-ho. Tyranny. Today, the parliamentary audit has been underway for four days. In the ruling party, the opposition party is now overusing the impeachment bill. And they claim to be the tyranny of the majority party.
The opposition party is raising its offensive level, saying that witnesses related to Kim are ignoring the National Assembly. We will listen to the voices of the floor leaders of the ruling and opposition parties.

[Anchor]
They say 99 witnesses adopted by the opposition party and one witness applied for the ruling party have been voted on. This is the argument of floor leader Choo Kyung-ho.

[Kim Sang Il]
Representative Choo Kyung-ho's argument is correct when it comes to individual issues. But there are things to look at only individual issues and things to look at the whole context. But in the whole context, it's the South Buddha. The current parliamentary inspection is a place to resolve the public's suspicions. You have to go in with that sense of responsibility and duty. No matter how many members of the ruling party are representatives of the people. If you want to point out that part of the Democratic Party, you have to make an effort to resolve the public's suspicions. Otherwise, he says it's bulletproof to Chairman Lee Jae-myung and the Democratic Party. They're doing BTS themselves. That's what I'm talking about.
Then, from the people's point of view, the parliamentary inspection is the same on both sides. They are doing things for themselves, not for the people, as a political controversy and as a hostile symbiosis. Han Kang received the Nobel Prize for Literature today. I was so happy about it that I thought of this. I should declare myself a political vegetarian. That's what I thought. When I had to be happy about writer Han Kang's work, I felt sad that the ruling and opposition parties' political disputes, and vegetarianism came to me like this because it was sad.

[Yeo Sangwon]
I watch CNN in the U.S. often.Ma is so different from the US Senate hearing and the Korean National Assembly hearing. The U.S. has lawmakers' own abilities, but many aides are incredibly good at setting up questions that keep witnesses stuck. by asking for facts However, if you look at the hearings in Korea, it is completely behind the scenes to the extent that you don't know whether it is a parliamentary election campaign or not, and all you had to do was make a persistent claim that if it were a problem with Kim Gun-hee, you would undermine her, and if the witness tried to answer. What kind of hearing is this? So there's a majority vote. Formally, it's true. In the end, if there is a disagreement with each other, it has to be a majority vote, but even with that majority vote, whether this person has a good intention to lead the real country, nation, and politics correctly. Depending on whether there is such a bad intention to lead to a purely political dispute, the principle of majority vote may become tyranny, as Rep. Choo Kyung-ho said. It can be a legitimate exercise of parliamentary power, but the current state of our National Assembly is pressing down on the minority with some majority power. Speaking of the accompanying order. This came out in our legal newspaper. Even if it is adopted as a witness by the court, if it does not come out, it will be a fine. There's no punishment. But in the National Assembly, the National Assembly makes this judgment. If you issue an accompanying order or don't come out, how much imprisonment will you charge? It's asking if this is balanced. And when they come out, they humiliate people. If you try to say something, you won't be able to say it. I think some of what Rep. Choo Kyung-ho is saying is right at such a hearing.

[Anchor]
Finally, let's talk about the by-election and move on. The by-election is just five days away. Early voting is taking place today. According to the polls released today and the polls released a few days ago, there were many places where it was close. According to a poll by the head of Geumjeong-gu, Busan, 43.5 to 40. Yoon Il-hyun, the power of the people, 43.5, and Kim Kyung-ji, the Democratic Party of Korea, 40.

[Kim Sang Il]
If you look at this election, you will see how much the people are dissatisfied with the politics. Because the stable foundations are shaking. When did Busan Geumjeong come out like that? Right now, the conservative support area is not stable in support of conservatives, and it is shaking. The same goes for glory. I don't know if there's a poll result. The candidates for the Progressive Party were originally very close to the Innovation Party, so they were competing fiercely. There are rumors that the candidate has a problem, but the candidates of the Progressive Party are coming up, and the three candidates are competing. So, the Democratic Party's support in Honam is also somewhat shaken. So, I think that I want politicians to look at me at least once through the standards and perspectives of criticizing others.

[Anchor]
CEO Lee Jae-myung must have gone down to Yeonggwang for one night and two days.

[Yeo Sangwon]
There's Busan Geumjeong, and there's a poll that the Democratic Party of Korea is higher now. Is it 45:43? I don't know exactly. The fact that this constituency has been such a strong place for the people to be the head of the district office eight out of nine times seems to have transformed this election into the support of the fight between representative Lee Jae-myung and the presidential office. It's not just a gold ball fight. Because the PK has almost defended the constitutional amendment in this general election of conservatives. to the point where But the problem is serious. If we lose here, we are expected to have a private meeting after the by-elections, but I don't know what will happen. And I think glory is also important. Until now, Honam and Yeonggwang were the gardens of the Democratic Party of Korea, right? Of course, the Cho Kuk Innovation Party came out, but the fact that the Progressive Party came out this time, which does not like the power of the people, but also the self-righteousness of Chairman Lee Jae-myung, and the way the Democratic Party of Korea is run like its own shrine, which is why the Honam voters are so bitter. So, if we become the Progressive Party this time in Glory. Isn't there a higher public opinion? I think CEO Lee Jae-myung should also think differently about Honam.

[Anchor]
I see. That's all for today's politics. Thank you very much. It was lawyer Yeo Sang-won and political critic Kim Sang-il. Thank you.