Myung Tae Gyun is at the prosecution for the second day."Why are you investigating fake news?" Opposition.

■ Host: Anchor Yoon Bori, anchor Cho Jin-hyuk
■ Starring: Attorney Seo Jeong-bin

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

[Anchor]
Myung Tae-kyun, a key figure in the alleged intervention of the nomination, attended the prosecution for two consecutive days.

[Anchor]
On the other hand, SK Group Chairman Chey Tae-won's divorce lawsuit, which drew attention from the divorce of the century, was judged by the Supreme Court.

Let's take a look at the news of the major incident with lawyer Seo Jeong-bin. Please come in.

[Anchor]
There was also a controversy over the belated investigation into Myung Tae-kyun, but he attended the prosecution today following yesterday. Now the investigation seems to be in full swing.

[Jeongbin Seo]
That's right. In fact, this case was already filed by the Gyeongsangnam-do Election Commission in December last year with the Changwon District Prosecutors' Office to request an investigation. However, at that time, the prosecutor paid dividends to the investigation department that did not exist, but about nine months later, it was handed over to the Criminal Department 4, which is in charge of public security cases, and criticism was pointed out that it was not a delayed investigation. Recently, however, prosecutors have also reinforced a lot, and a total of 11 people are currently running an investigation team, so the investigation is expected to proceed quickly in the future.

[Anchor]
Myung Tae-kyun was summoned as a suspect for two days, so can you summarize the suspicions and major charges he is receiving?

[Jeongbin Seo]
First of all, I think I can talk about three things. First of all, Kim Young-sun, a former member of the People's Power who was elected to Changwon's Changwon district in the June 2022 parliamentary by-election, is suspected of receiving 96.7 million won in salary dozens of times from August to December 2022. The prosecution suspects that the money Myung received was the price of former lawmaker Kim's nomination. Another is suspected of having influenced the race by manipulating U.S. public opinion polls through the Future Korea Research Institute, a polling company that is known to have been run by Myung during the People's Power race in connection with the 20th presidential election. And one of the recently revealed problems is that he also intervened in the designation of Changwon's second national industrial complex, received confidential documents from Changwon City, and recommended acquaintances to purchase surrounding land.

[Anchor]
There are three major suspicions, but Myung Tae-kyun pointed out the first part, the alleged violation of the Political Fund Act. Look into it, I said this. How do you see it?

[Jeongbin Seo]
That's right. Interviews show that he is now in violation of the Political Fund Act and does not answer questions about other issues. There are two false news about telling a story. One is News Tomato and the other is that the mountains of lies built up by Kang Hye-kyung will collapse under investigation in the future, and among the main charges, lies will be revealed about the alleged violation of the Political Fund Act. In fact, it seems to have shown this confident attitude, but on the other hand, we don't specifically state what kind of problem there is and what can be proven by ourselves in the interview, so we have to see if this is a confidence or a kind of poker face.

[Anchor]
In fact, the prosecution is known to have investigated Myung directly into allegations of nomination and violations of the Political Fund Act, but when he appeared at the prosecution yesterday, he said, "It can be solved by looking at the money flow." What does it mean?

[Jeongbin Seo]
In the end, I think what Myung Tae-kyun wants to talk about can be summarized like this. If he had actively intervened in former lawmaker Kim Young-sun's nomination, there would have been a price for it, and the price would have been a total financial benefit, but he seems to be saying that there is nothing to come out of this. In fact, I received money, but for the 96.7 million won and the salary, I think that there might have been no financial transaction other than real, or even if there was, it would have been in a way that was difficult to capture.

[Anchor]
said they received the money they lent, but didn't Kang Hye-kyung say they gave it to them in exchange for the nomination? If this is true, what will be the level of punishment if it is true that you gave him a salary?

[Jeongbin Seo]
If this is true, we expect that the level of punishment will be considerably heavier compared to other cases. In fact, former lawmaker Park Soon-ja, who recently received bribes in exchange for the nomination of city councilors in local elections, was sentenced to two and a half years in prison. If you intervene in the nomination and receive a price in this way, it is an important crime that can shake the foundation of elections or even democracy, so considering these points, if the facts are revealed as they are, you could be severely punished.

[Anchor]
Then, if it wasn't for the nomination, as Myung Tae-kyun claimed, would it be okay for a lawmaker to pay back the money he had traded between the private parties with his salary?

[Jeongbin Seo]
In fact, a salary is, in short, a salary, and even if you pay off your personal debt, you can't legally take this as an issue. That's why Myung Tae-kyun seems to be claiming that he received the money he lent. On the other hand, former lawmaker Kim Young-sun also appears to be claiming that he gave the money to Kang Hye-kyung to repay his debt, even though he is not familiar with it.

[Anchor]
Isn't there a suspicion that another one of the suspicions that Myung Tae-kyun is facing is manipulating the public power primary poll? How will the prosecution investigate this?

[Jeongbin Seo]
Another allegation that is in question now was revealed when a transcript came out of a phone call with Kang Hye-kyung during the presidential primary, and there were some instructions to Kang Hye-kyung to manipulate public opinion at the time. At that time, he ordered that Yoon Suk Yeol be 2~3% more than Hong Joon Pyo, and Kang said in the recent parliamentary audit that Myung fabricated at least a few polls for Yoon during the last presidential election. As far as I know, the prosecution has said it will investigate, and it is expected to investigate in detail whether there was actually manipulation of public opinion and how the results of the investigation were used in the end. In fact, there are conflicting claims that the statute of limitations under the Public Official Election Act has expired or not, so it may be decided whether or not a detailed investigation will be conducted.

[Anchor]
I'm curious about the poll, there's a non-disclosure that says it's for public use, that we've decided to look at it among ourselves, and that we've decided to look at it for reference. If it's manipulated regardless, can it be considered illegal?

[Jeongbin Seo]
In fact, I don't think I can cut it like that and talk about it. If the data is non-publicized and only internally confirmed, there may be no legal problems, but the important thing is how the data was used and even if it has not been published, it can be legally problematic if it is shared with those involved and the information has been spread.

[Anchor]
However, the Future Korea Research Institute, which is known to have conducted this poll, said that Myung Tae-kyun had nothing to do with me, that I was not the real owner. Can this part be different whether or not to be prosecuted?

[Jeongbin Seo]
Of course, if it turns out to be true that he is not the owner, as Myung Tae-kyun claims, he did not run it, it could be a little difficult to punish him in a specific legal manner because he is not the representative of the organization that conducted this poll. However, looking at the contents so far, there is a separate name, but there are also transcripts that specifically instruct these tasks, so I think it will be revealed that it is the actual operator and the actual representative, and if so, there is a good possibility of punishment when the rest of the facts are recognized.

[Anchor]
And another issue, the selection of Changwon National Industrial Complex, will also be pointed out. So, Myung Tae-kyun is suspected of being involved in the selection of the industrial complex, but Kang Hye-kyung knew about it even before the government official announcement. And Myung Tae-kyun says that he has only proposed a policy. As Kang Hye-kyung claims, if Myung Tae-kyun knew this before the announcement, what kind of problem would this be?

[Jeongbin Seo]
If that happens, it will eventually be a public official who provided this information, and in the case of that public official, it will be a crime of leaking official secrets. One problem, however, is that public officials who provided information have punishment regulations in the case of leaking official secrets, but there are no punishment regulations for those who are provided with them, and in the case of Supreme Court precedents, it is difficult to punish those who are provided with information as accomplices. Therefore, even if this turns out to be true, if there are no special circumstances, it is difficult to punish Myung Tae-kyun as an accomplice of leaking official secrets with this alone. However, if there are more involved and the charges are added, it could be punished as another sin.

[Anchor]
However, it is all false claims that Myung Tae-kyun created these controversies by Kang Hye-kyung. That's what I'm saying. The arguments from both sides are very different, so what do you think of the possibility of a cross-examination?

[Jeongbin Seo]
In fact, we expect that cross-examination will be possible enough. Of course, related transcripts have been released so far, so we will not discuss such credibility first, but specifically, since the parts that the parties are talking about are so different, it is expected that the contents will be clarified a little more through cross-examination, and I think not only Kang Hye-kyung but also former lawmaker Kim Young-sun can examine the credibility of the statement through cross-examination.

[Anchor]
Regarding this case, what do you think about the possibility of an investigation as the names of President Yoon Suk Yeol and First Lady Kim Gun-hee continue to be mentioned in relation to Myung Tae-kyun?

[Jeongbin Seo]
In fact, I don't think we can rule out that there is a possibility of an investigation at all, but if the investigation begins in the case of such a president or Mrs. Kim, the prosecution has no choice but to consider this anyway, as the political ripple is expected to be quite large regardless of the legal issue. If so, I think it will be difficult to predict that a practical investigation will be conducted for the time being.

[Anchor]
Myung Tae-kyun has said that his testimony continues to fluctuate and that he will burn the evidence. It can be seen as a statement about the destruction of evidence, but how do you view the arrest investigation?

[Jeongbin Seo]
It seems that there is a possibility that it will be an arrest investigation. As you said, he said that he would burn the evidence after the release of the recording with President Yoon regarding the evidence, and after that, he restored text data from his cell phone. He is actively defending that he did not try to destroy the evidence, but was actually trying to recover the evidence. However, since the statements have been so inconsistent, it is questionable whether these things can be trusted. In addition, considering the seriousness of the case, not only the destruction of evidence but also the seriousness of the case is considered in determining whether or not to be arrested, and the allegations currently being made seem to be quite serious. Therefore, if the allegations are identified to some extent through the initial investigation, the possibility of being investigated while in custody is quite high.

[Anchor]
Let's move on to the next case.

In the end, the Supreme Court heard the divorce lawsuit between SK Group Chairman Chey Tae-won and Art Center Director Noh So-young. The Supreme Court didn't make a decision to dismiss the hearing until midnight yesterday, but it's a little hard to say. What just happened here?

[Jeongbin Seo]
First of all, in the case of the appeals court, director Roh So-young was granted a total of 1.388 trillion won in property division, and Chairman Chey Tae-won has since appealed to the Supreme Court. However, in the case of an appeal, in addition to criminal cases, civil or domestic cases have requirements for specific appeals. So, they made an unfair interpretation in the constitution or the law, or in the lower court. Or, if it is a matter that needs to be changed in case law or such, the hearing will continue, and if it is determined that it is not, it may be simply dismissed without further hearing. This is what Director Noh So-young is saying to dismiss. In this case, the appeal record will be received and it will be decided within four months. However, since that deadline has passed now, it can be seen that the Supreme Court will consider the contents of this issue and hear it again in the future.

[Anchor]
Over the past five years, the Supreme Court's rejection rate of non-continuity of the appeal hearing has exceeded 80%. Nevertheless, the Supreme Court's decision to continue the hearing has a lot to look into, can it be seen like this?

[Jeongbin Seo]
I think it's okay to look at it like that. In fact, in divorce cases, most cases are mainly focused on examining facts rather than legal issues at the lower level, so the rejection rate of non-continuity of the hearing seems to be over 80%. In this case, the issues such as how far the property division targets were in the first and second trials were quite fierce, and in fact, the first and second trials themselves had very different conclusions, so it can be seen that these points need to be examined and judged in detail.

[Anchor]
So, the key to the issue of property this time is whether this company has been raised this much after becoming a couple, or whether the father's contribution has been greater. Can you explain it in more detail?

[Jeongbin Seo]
First of all, the most problematic thing is whether SK's shares held by Chairman Chey Tae-won are subject to property division. Next, even if this is subject to property division, I think we can divide it into how much the contribution of director Roh So-young should be calculated. In the case of Chairman Chey Tae-won, he has argued that it is not a property that Director Roh So-young can use to divide the property because it was inherited from his predecessor because it is an SK stock he previously owned. However, in the first trial, Chairman Chey Tae-won's argument was accepted as it was, but it was overturned in the second trial, and if it is a unique property first of all, it is expected that there will be a considerable dispute over this part.

[Anchor]
Earlier, the second trial's appeal decision was revised. Chairman Choi pointed out that there was a fatal calculation error, but will this process also affect the Supreme Court's judgment?

[Jeongbin Seo]
This part is also expected to have a little impact. This part is a little complicated, so to explain it as easily as possible, it will eventually determine how much the stock held by Chairman Chey Tae-won has risen in value during the marriage period, whether it was Chey Tae-won's efforts that contributed to this stock, or how much of his predecessor's efforts were put into it. However, the appeals court set the reference point as the time of the death of the predecessor around 1998, and checked the changes in stock value before and after that, but due to the miscalculation of the amount, Chairman Chey Tae-won's contribution increased tenfold and the predecessor's contribution was reduced by one-tenth. If this happens, director Noh So-young's side has had this much wealth growth during the marriage period, making it easier to be recognized for their contribution and being highly appreciated for their contribution. Therefore, I think this point is not a problem that can end up simply as a miscalculation. Depending on the amount and the degree of contribution, it will eventually be a specific criterion for determining how much director Noh So-young contributes, so this seems to be an important part.

In fact, one of the issues that can be controversial in the appeal right now is the inflow of slush funds. At the appeal trial, a slush fund problem arose due to photos of promissory notes submitted by director Roh So-young, and eventually, he claimed that 30 billion won of slush funds from director Lee So-young's father, former President Roh Tae-woo, was introduced and that was the basis for the SK Group's expansion, and the appeals court acknowledged this. However, Chairman Chey Tae-won refutes this part by saying that there has been no concrete proof of the inflow of slush funds, and even if such slush funds have actually been introduced, I think it will be a matter to consider whether there is a significant causal relationship in SK's current growth. On the other hand, the amount of the slush fund is known to be 30 billion won at the time, and as a result, the amount of property division decided by director Roh So-young at the second trial is 1.308 trillion won. So it's almost 46 times the amount. On the one hand, illegal funds have been invested, and in the end, I think it is a matter of considering whether it is reasonable for the child to take 46 times the amount in the form of a property division.

[Anchor]
The property division is worth 1.3 trillion won.

[Anchor]
Finally, let's look at the last case.

Yesterday, there was a final trial in the case of a medical student's harrowing murder of his girlfriend. The prosecution asked for the death penalty. Can you explain the outline of this case, the old background?

[Jeongbin Seo]
Defendant Choi was arrested and charged with murdering his girlfriend by stabbing her several times on the roof of a building near Gangnam Station in Seoul on May 6. The prosecution asked for the death penalty. If you look at the reason for the sentence a little bit, it is a crime that had a detailed plan in advance because the crime tool was prepared in advance while committing the crime and luring it to the prepared place. And until the end, he seems to be shifting his responsibility for this crime, so it does not show whether there is sincere reflection on the victim. So I asked for the death penalty because I had no choice but to choose the extreme sentence so that I could isolate myself from society forever.

[Anchor]
However, it is said that the suspect also admitted that he committed a planned crime, so can this attitude work in favor of sentencing?

[Jeongbin Seo]
In fact, it is not common to argue that it was a premeditated crime in such cases. Most often claim that it was an accidental crime, but this case seems a little unusual. Of course, if you confess to the crime as it is, that is also one of the important data in determining sentencing, and on the other hand, acknowledging all crimes can be interpreted as an attitude of reflection. However, in this case, given the reasons the prosecution demanded and revealed, I think that confession may be a very important factor in the actual sentencing, whether it can be judged as a circumstance that can affect the actual sentencing just by acknowledging the premeditated crime.

[Anchor]
However, against this backdrop of constant social violence, there are continuous criticisms that Korea has too low related punishment compared to overseas. What do you think about the necessity of revising related laws?

[Jeongbin Seo]
In fact, violent and violent crimes often occur these days, especially during or between relationships. As a result, there are naturally claims that the level of punishment should be raised. However, even in the current law, when these problems go to the general criminal law or related laws, the level of punishment can be sufficiently raised, and in reality, the level of punishment tends to increase. Therefore, it is necessary to revise the criminal law or related laws that raise such punishment itself, but what is more important than that is that there should be such a legal mechanism to protect victims a little more before the problem occurs.

For example, in the case of the Stalking Punishment Act, there is a system in place in which victims can request emergency measures and isolate them from the perpetrators in the event of an offense, but there is a poor legal system to request and request such measures in advance in normal social situations or for violent crimes between people who have been involved.

[Anchor]
Let's stop here. So far, I've talked with lawyer Seo Jeong-bin.

Thank you for talking today.