[Politics ON] The third "Mrs. Kim's Special Counsel Act" passed...Lee Jae-myung's first trial sentence D-1 'Tactile'

■ Host: Youngsoo Kim anchor
■ Starring: Lawyer Kang Jeon-ae, Lawyer Cho Ki-yeon

* 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, I will analyze the situation of the plenary session with lawyer Kang Jeon-ae and lawyer Cho Ki-yeon and the first trial sentence of representative Lee Jae-myung. Prior to the analysis, a breaking news came in, so we will deliver it briefly and start the discussion.

There is a news report that the power of the people has decided to proceed with the process of recommending the special inspector to the National Assembly. The decision was made at the general meeting a little while ago. Floor leader Choo Kyung-ho announced that he would push for a special inspector as his party's theory and that he would appoint all related matters to the floor leader.

I'll give it to you again. There has been controversy over the appointment of a special inspector. I've organized it. I opened the gun. We've decided to pursue it as a party platform. In addition, the plenary session passed today regarding the Special Prosecutor's Law for Mrs. Kim. He said he would also propose the exercise of the president's right to demand reconsideration. We will continue today's discussion with breaking news that the special inspector of people's power, the National Assembly's recommendation process, has decided to proceed with the party's theory.

Here we go, Jeong-on. Lawyer Kang Jeon-ae and lawyer Cho Ki-yeon are here. Please come in. Hello, I have a lot of news today. Since you two have a lawyer's license, I think you will explain it in a little more detail. I'll listen to it myself. Please show us the first keyword. I'm fired.

Park Chan-dae is the floor leader. At today's plenary session, the opposition party's Special Prosecutor Kim Act was passed. However, it is expected that President Yoon will exercise his veto power. If so, the re-vote will take place on the 28th. The battle between the ruling and opposition parties over the independent counsel law is expected to continue in the future. At the meeting this morning, Park Chan-dae, the floor leader, warned that the people would order the dismissal if they again rejected the Kim Gun-hee independent counsel law. Floor leader Choo Kyung-ho responded, "Crime bulletproof is a dangerous idea." We will listen to the voices of the floor leaders of the ruling and opposition parties.

[Anchor]
The First Lady Kim Special Counsel Act, we continued to break the news earlier. I also heard an explanation from a reporter. Lawyer Cho Ki-yeon, please explain in more detail. The special prosecution law passed this time has passed the special prosecution law twice, and it was canceled due to a re-decision. How is it different from this special prosecutor?

[Early]
First of all, the last two special prosecution laws have added several more allegations on the way from the first to the second special prosecution law. So, the number increased to 13, and because of that, the issue of recommendation rights, public briefings, and unconstitutionality, which was originally a problem, have been pointed out, but they have continuously raised the question that they cannot receive more because the subject of investigation is added. So Park Chan-dae, the floor leader of the party, expressed his position prospectively, and if so, he said he would come up with a bill that was pointed out by the power of the people and revised the issues that representative Han Dong-hoon talked about.

So, this time, the recommendation method was changed to a three-way recommendation method that representative Han Dong-hoon talked about, and the opposition party recommended two of the people recommended and recommended by the Chief Justice of the Supreme Court to the president. The subject of investigation has also been compressed into two categories. Kim Gun-hee's alleged stock price manipulation, Myung Tae-kyun's election intervention, and nomination intervention. If you do this, it is a bill that solves the core problem that the power of the people has been talking about so far. I mean, I can't help but accept it. Then, if there is an additional problem after sufficient discussion, the bill can be repaired. It is a special prosecution law that was put forward with the position of opening up the possibility of dialogue and allowing the special prosecution to pass by agreement.

[Anchor]
There is a story that the opposition party has the right to veto the special prosecution law, lawyer Kang Jeon-ae.

[Kang Gang-ae]
That's right. That's where the problem is again. The Chief Justice of the Supreme Court recommends it, but in the end, if the opposition party does not like it, it has the authority to prevent the president from going to the recommendation. Of course, Democrats are saying that they can amend the bill here. On the other hand, the People's Power thinks that the Democratic Party's proposal of this bill itself is for political dispute, so it is not sincere about it.

In the case of the Deutsche Motors case, the prosecution has already talked about the reasons for not prosecuting in great detail. And the prosecution was deprived of the right to command the investigation, except for the prosecutor general. The head of the Seoul Central District Prosecutors' Office is talking about impeaching him. If so, I think you should ask why you are not raising the issue with Rep. Lee Sung-yoon.

Rep. Lee Sung-yoon was in the process of leading the Deutsche Motors case of First Lady Kim Gun-hee as the head of the Seoul Central District Prosecutors' Office in the past. These parts are also used for political disputes. And in the case of Myung Tae-kyun, we will talk a little later, but the investigation is underway. And because we are conducting a warrant review today, the Democratic Party continues to distrust the investigative agencies, the police, and the prosecution, which are now legislated. If so, I think the Democratic Party should tell the people about the reason for creating the Senior Civil Servant Corruption Investigations Unit.

The Democratic Party of Korea took the initiative in creating the Senior Civil Servant Corruption Investigations Unit because it did not trust the prosecution, but now it may not trust the Senior Civil Servant Corruption Investigations Unit, but let's go to the Special Prosecutor's Office, and I think it will be difficult for the people to accept it now.

[Anchor]
I see. I have a lot of issues today. I'd like both of you to organize your answers a little shorter. I told you in the news a while ago that floor leader Choo Kyung-ho has decided to propose the exercise of the president's right to request reconsideration. Then, you think we'll usually re-decide on the 28th, right?

[Early Delayed]
The Democratic Party has already announced something.

[Anchor]
When we re-decided twice, it was rejected. What are you expecting this time?

[Early Delayed]
Well, looking at the atmosphere inside the people's power recently, some say that it has become more difficult, but there may be eight people who have not spoken.

[Anchor]
Last time, there were four leave votes. Now, 108 people, two-thirds of them have to approve it, so eight people have to vote to leave, so do you think it's difficult for now?

[Early Delayed]
It won't be easy, but I don't think it's possible at all. Anyway, it is an independent counsel bill that reflects some of the demands of the people. It seems that there is a good possibility of some lawmakers leaving in the process because they will discuss more openly through consultation, but they are probably concerned about those things, so they did not respond to the vote by leaving today. If a single vote departure occurred today, it would be a very bad signal.

[Anchor]
I'll also talk about the special inspector. I just broke the news a while ago, but the power of the people is being promoted by the party of the special inspector. The Democratic Party of Korea is in the position that the independent counsel should come first.

[Early Delayed]
That's right. It is common sense that the special inspector cannot take any effective measures to solve the problem of First Lady Kim Gun-hee, which has been raised now.

[Anchor]
Then the charges can't proceed at all, right?

[Early Delayed]
That's right. What does that mean now, this is the basic position of the Democratic Party. The special inspector system was claimed by representative Han Dong-hoon and now pro-Yoon-gye lawmakers are also receiving it, but from the beginning, the special inspector system was a battle for political justification, which is an important way to resolve suspicions related to Kim Gun-hee, I don't think it was a problem in this area.

[Anchor]
Lawyer Kang Jeon-ae, I've heard the opposition party's position now, and the Democratic Party's position comes first, even if the people's power is pushed toward the party's theory. There is no consultation, and the special inspector is in the position that various suspicions cannot be resolved. Nevertheless, you're going to push forward with the party's current theory, so how can it work? Because the majority party is the opposition party.

[Kang Kang Ae]
In fact, during the last Moon Jae In administration, there was no special inspector, right? In a way, the cases related to Moon Da-hye, these things could have been prevented if there was a special inspector at the time, and as President Yoon Suk Yeol's presidential election pledge, I said I would appoint a special inspector.

However, the problem was that the Democratic Party of Korea was reluctant to recommend the director of the North Korean Human Rights Foundation even though the North Korean Human Rights Act was passed in 2016 when the government actually began, so we wanted to proceed with that part together because we were looking at North Korea. As a result of today's parliamentary meeting, there is something regrettable about the North Korean Human Rights Foundation, but except for the one recommended by the Democratic Party, isn't it that they will proceed with the special inspector only? As lawyer Cho Ki-yeon said, what kind of past events can the special inspector organize? I also have a question about that.

However, I think there are definitely preventive images and images of the president's office renovating and reaching out to the people. Then, in the process of appointing a special inspector, the National Assembly should recommend three people. I don't think it is preposterous to say that I will conduct an independent counsel on suspicions related to Kim Gun-hee that I cannot be with her in the process of recommending her now, and that I will not be with her in the appointment of a special inspector while continuing to raise questions.

[Anchor]
I see. I listened carefully to the ruling and opposition parties' positions. Let's move on to the next keyword. Please show me.

This is CEO Han Dong-hoon. Today, I used the expression "self-harm marketing" to choose it as self-harm. Representative Lee Jae-myung's first trial sentence for violating the Public Official Election Act is just a day away. CEO Han Dong-hoon raised the level of criticism by saying, "Self-harm marketing doesn't work." On the other hand, the Democratic Party was confident that the leadership system would not waver even if they were found guilty. I'll listen to it myself.

Representative Han Dong-hoon is marketing the Democratic Party of Korea's self-harm. So, this is the first trial, and if you are finally convicted and fined more than 1 million won, you will be sentenced to invalidity of your election. Then, is the Democratic Party talking about the need for the Democratic Party to cough up 43.4 billion won in election subsidies from the state?

[Early Delayed]
Well, who would have said that? This is an objective fact. If the invalidity of the election comes out, we have to return the election compensation. That's 43 billion won. I'm sure it's quite fatal in the party's financial situation, but who's highlighting this now and please the court do it for that, does anyone claim like this?

If you are claiming innocence legally and come out as a result of this, it is quite burdensome to the party. I can say this, but it is not true to criticize it by labeling it self-harm marketing, and criticism in that way does not seem very convincing.

[Anchor]
Lawyer Kang Jeon-ae, why did CEO Han Dong-hoon bring up that today?

[Kang Kang Ae]
First of all, lawyer Cho Ki-yeon says that when the court sentenced Lee Jae-myung to more than 1 million won tomorrow, Lee Jae-myung will also have a criminal record, but the Democratic Party itself could be shaken, but it is true that there have been such stories continuously.

If so, it can be burdensome to make a ruling against the Democratic Party of Korea, beyond making a judgment on individuals, so if you look at the data submitted to the Central Election Commission by the Democratic Party of Korea, as of the end of June this year, the political funds currently have a balance of 49.2 billion won. And since there is a building, there is a property of about 100 billion won, so it seems to have come from the process of emphasizing that the court does not need to pay attention to this 43.4 billion won.

[Anchor]
No one knows if they will be found guilty or not guilty tomorrow. Lee Jae-myung's first trial sentencing tomorrow, and political circles are now seeing various prospects. Our reporter pointed out the violation of the election law tomorrow, what the key content is. Reporter Kwon Jun-su's report will continue with the conversation.

[Reporter]
The charges filed against Lee Jae-myung are false information under the Public Official Election Act. The important issue is whether the representative's remarks are false, whether the remarks were aimed at winning elections, and whether what was said in broadcast interviews and parliamentary audits can be regarded as "public announcement." The prosecution and representative Lee are arguing whether the remarks made during the last presidential election are false.

First of all, the prosecution believes that CEO Lee and Director Kim Moon-ki are special friends who attend seminars together and go on a golf trip on an overseas business trip. However, CEO Lee did not know Kim, and emphasizes that "knowing someone" cannot be judged objectively as it is a subjective area.

The same goes for the "Baekhyun-dong Threat" remark that the Ministry of Land, Infrastructure and Transport threatened to change its purpose. CEO Lee claims that "feeling pressure" is not a false fact because it is subjective, but the prosecution believes that it distorted objective facts because there was no request from the Ministry of Land, Infrastructure and Transport to change the use.

Whether the next few remarks in question are aimed at winning the election, this is also an important point. Representative Lee says that it is just a simple "mistake of words" as he was spontaneously responding to complicated issues during broadcast interviews and state audits. On the other hand, the prosecution claims that it was possible to predict that suspicions would be raised as the relevant content became an issue at the time and that it had enough time to prepare for an answer, and that it made false statements "willfully, actively, and repeatedly" for the presidency.

In addition, it is also an issue whether remarks made in broadcast interviews and parliamentary audits can be viewed as a 'public announcement' unilaterally announced. How will the court judge the legal battle that has been going on for more than two years over these issues? I'm YTN Kwon Junsu.

[Anchor]
Reporter Kwon Jun-su is a reporter entering the law, and I explained the issue well. Both of you are lawyers, so please predict how you will expect it and the impact. What do you expect?

[Early Delayed]
According to the position of representative Lee Jae-myung's lawyer, which the reporter has said, of course, he is innocent. The first is that there should be a sense of purpose in the election, but since it came out in the process of answering questions during interviews or remarks at the National Assembly, it cannot be seen as a statement made with a sense of purpose in the election.

The second should correspond to the time of fact, but whether the problem of memory and subjective perception can be viewed as a time of fact, this is probably the first question, and usually answers that they don't remember even when interrogating witnesses in trials. As long as you don't make statements against your memory. When you say you don't remember something, you don't judge it as perjury. Because subjectively, there is a basic legal principle that I cannot legally evaluate the part that I do not remember, not that I know or do not have such a fact.

Third, falsehood. Is this false? It can be said that he didn't know Kim Moon-ki when he was mayor of Seongnam. Because if you look at the size of the team leader level at the time, just because you went on a business trip together, fishing, and playing golf, as you have submitted to the prosecution, you can't say that the memory continued when you said it.

Lastly, was there any awareness of falsehood? I don't remember this fact and at that point, I can't see it as a statement knowing that it's false, so I think both are likely to be innocent.

[Anchor]
We've heard lawyer Cho Ki-yeon's explanation. What about lawyer Kang Jeon-ae?

[Kang Kang Ae]
First of all, regarding the Baekhyun-dong retaining wall apartment case, four types have been raised from natural green areas to semi-residential areas. There is a person named Kim In-seop in this process. When Lee Jae-myung ran for mayor of Seongnam in the past, he served as the chairman of the campaign committee. And after that, in Seongnam City, he was nicknamed "Permit Room." When running an election camp, the person you trust the most and the person closest to you contracts the real estate you use as an election camp. Kim In-seop was that kind of person to CEO Lee Jae-myung and Seongnam Mayor candidate at the time. But a developer named Jung Paul was trying to develop the Baekhyun-dong site, but the permit was not continuously received from Seongnam City.

At that time, Kim In-seop was used as a lobbyist, and four types were upgraded right away. I raised a question about this, and I said that what Representative Lee Jae-myung said to drop Kim In-seop was threatened by the Ministry of Land, Infrastructure and Transport of the Park Geun Hye government. In the end, he talked about the Ministry of Land, Infrastructure and Transport of the Park Geun Hye government to cover up corruption of his aides, but the problem is that Kim In-seop worked as a lobbyist, and his personal rulings are shown.

And in the case of Jeong Jin-sang, who admitted that CEO Lee Jae-myung is a close aide and a close aide, Jung Shin-jang is working as a policy secretary in Seongnam City and asking the head of the city planning team to take good care of the case Kim In-seop brought. These things are now in Kim In-seop's ruling. When looking at these parts, there are parts that seem very unfavorable to CEO Lee Jae-myung. There is a Supreme Court sentencing guidelines table for publicizing false information.

However, if it is a matter that is very important to the candidate's judgment and evaluation, it becomes a weighting factor. When there are weighting factors like this, in the case of publicizing false information for the purpose of election, the minimum price is 5 million won even if the fine is chosen. Therefore, from Lee Jae-myung's point of view, if it is not aggravated and even if it is basic, 2 million won will be on the sentencing standard, and lawmaker Yoon Sang-hyun talked about 800,000 won.

In fact, there are many people who received 800,000 won and 900,000 won. There are parts that were judged slightly differently from the Supreme Court's sentencing guidelines, and I think Lee Jae-myung's first trial is so national that in the end, the court will judge according to the Supreme Court's sentencing guidelines even if it is burdensome.

[Anchor]
I see. Then, lawyer Kang Jeon-ae is 2 million won to 5 million won?

[Kang Kang Ae]
So even if it's basic, it's 2 million won. If the weighting factor is taken into account, the minimum price is 5 million won.

[Anchor]
I see. I've heard of not guilty claims and guilty claims. So what do MPs have in mind? Political circles are also divided over the first sentence of Lee Jae-myung's representative tomorrow. Let's listen to it. Political circles are now seeing mixed prospects ahead of the first trial of Democratic Party Chairman Lee Jae-myung on charges of violating the Public Official Election Act. The Democratic Party is planning a rally in Seocho-dong tomorrow, right?

[Early Delayed]
It's not an official rally at the party level. It seems that those who have actively supported Lee Jae-myung and engaged in political action led by the Democratic Innovation Conference are spreading the message of gathering in Seocho-dong. Even if you don't do it systematically, there seems to be that kind of public opinion.On the other hand, will it be helpful for the party leadership to be seen in front of the court in such a way? And it is also true that there are concerns about how the people will see it.

[Anchor]
There must be a story that the Democratic Party of Korea wants to gather as many as possible at the Seocho-dong rally tomorrow. How do you see the power of the people?

[Kang Kang Ae]
This, of course, can only be seen as pressure on the court. And isn't the Democratic Party now saying it will become the next ruling party? Then there should be respect for the judiciary. What's unusual is that I'll talk about condemning the prosecution in front of the Seoul Central District Court tomorrow. If so, you have to go to the Central District Prosecutors' Office, but you're going to the local law. This raises a question about the prosecution that prosecuted the prosecution as a result, but if the court convicts Lee Jae-myung, it can only be seen that the impeachment of the judge is implicitly pressuring the prosecutors, just as they say they will impeach the prosecutors now. I'm sure there are parts that the people think about this.

[Anchor]
Regarding tomorrow, the first trial sentence was decided not to be broadcast live. And yesterday, about 40 opposition lawmakers launched an impeachment regiment. This is different from the official moves of the Democratic Party leadership, right?

[Early Delayed]
That's right. However, the Democratic Party is not officially considering or discussing impeachment. I don't think it's the right time to do that. Public opinion is said to be a psychological impeachment, but in order to reach an actual impeachment, at least a national consensus on a serious violation of the law or constitution must be formed, but even if it is actually at that stage, has it reached a national consensus on the procedure for actual impeachment, voting in the National Assembly, and voting in the Constitutional Court? This part means that we should go carefully and carefully, and the president has experience that he can impeach at any time in 2017 if he violates the law or the Constitution, but that does not mean that there is a demand that impeachment proceedings should be carried out at any time. The official position is that we will carefully watch the public opinion and follow it.

[Anchor]
You saw the members of the impeachment alliance launched yesterday. The power of the people became the formation of this impeachment alliance. There are about 40 opposition lawmakers. How are you watching it?

[Kang Kang Ae]
As far as I know, the Democratic Party of Korea and the Cho Kuk Innovation Party are together. The Democratic Party of Korea is talking as if it is taking a step back, but what did floor leader Park Chan-dae say earlier today? Floor leader Park Chan-dae said earlier that if he rejects the Kim Gun-hee independent counsel law again, the public will order him to be fired. I think all of our people know what this dismissal means. If Lee Jae-myung is sentenced this week, tomorrow, and the 25th of the perjury teacher case, I think there is a very high possibility that the Democratic Party will jump in earnest when the answer that the Democratic Party wants does not come out.

[Anchor]
In the midst of this, former National Assembly Secretary-General Yoo In-tae, an elder member of the opposition party, said some bitter words as the Democratic Party continues to hold weekly outdoor rallies over the weekend. Let's listen to it.

[Anchor]
As former Secretary-General Yoo In-tae talks about it, it seems to be a different aspect from the past impeachment of former President Park Geun Hye. I said it to the effect that it's not good for the party to come first.

[Early Delayed]
That's right. Among the previous contents, you said that it doesn't help to gather public resentment and that it seems to be a secret, but some people are using this case for other political purposes in relation to Representative Lee Jae-myung. I think you said that it can be seen like that, but you can do it enough as a senior member of the party, but if you go out, you don't. This is not being held only by party members and organized party members. Of course, many people are not able to enter because they only put up protective walls as much as the areas authorized by the police, but the actual public response is also great.

However, this is a means of conveying public opinion that the National Assembly should play its role in that it is expected to veto the special prosecution law at least on the 28th, rather than unconditionally expanding the rally with impeachment in mind, and the public agrees on it.

[Anchor] What about lawyer Kang
?

[Kang Kang Ae]
However, regarding the outdoor rally, should I say it's very timely now? As soon as winter begins without doing it in autumn and summer, I told my supporters to prepare a padded jacket, as soon as Representative Lee Jae-myung's sentence approached. As a result, I have no choice but to doubt that I am gathering people for Lee Jae-myung's sentencing and for bulletproof purposes.

And there were the first and second rallies, but people didn't gather as much as they thought, so don't you see them with the union? I think it shows that the people don't give much heart to the president and the ruling party right now, which is true, but that doesn't mean that the opposition party doesn't want to be with the opposition leader at this rally for BTS.

[Anchor]
I see. Thank you very much. Today, representative Lee Jae-myung's spouse, Kim Hye-kyung, was sentenced to the first trial on charges of violating the Public Official Election Act. I understand that the prosecution asked for a fine of 3 million won, but the first trial was fined 1.5 million won.

[Early Delayed]
It came out a little more than I expected. I thought there was a possibility of innocence, but even if he was found guilty, it would not reach that level. The question was whether Mrs. Kim Hye-kyung knew that the secretary Bae was paying for the amount, and from the stage of preparing for the meeting in advance, she ordered, conspired, or implicitly knew that there was a meal of the day and paid for it, but she has maintained that she did not know. Then the prosecution must prove that it knew, but there is no actual statement.

So there's no evidence, but that's the situation. However, in that part, there was some back and forth in the testimony of the officer Bae, and evidence related to the participants that the cash payment was made, and the Posgi data confirmed that it was not clearly revealed. It is correct to think that the court must have known while synthesizing such situations, I think it was judged like this. I saw it like this, "There's no way I didn't know in context." There were various circumstances to make that judgment, but Kim Hye-kyung still maintains that she does not know or did not know, and there are circumstances or statements that correspond to it, so she will prove her innocence through appeal at the appeal trial.

[Anchor]
Lawyer Kang Jeon-ae was fined 1.5 million won for the first trial. How are you watching it?

[Kang Kang Ae]
As lawyer Cho Ki-yeon said, it seems that it came out a little more than expected. It seems that the court thought that the nature of the crime was not good.

[Anchor]
You're saying you paid 104,000 won for the meal to a Democratic Party official, right?

[Kang Kang Ae]
There was a person who introduced it to me. And it was the former speaker's spouses who ate together. If so, if you look at the contents of the ruling now, it was Kim Hye-kyung who received any benefits at this meal. Because at that time, representative Lee Jae-myung announced that he would run for president.

In such a situation, Bae made such a donation on the day Kim Hye-kyung tolerated and tolerated the payment made by Bae, who was now an official at the provincial government. And now, it is judged that the defendant, Kim Hye-kyung, had intentions sequentially and implicitly. However, it is also the reason for the ruling that there was a scene where the responsibility was passed on to Bae in the process of reaching up to 1.5 million won. That's why the sentence of 1.5 million won came out because of the bad nature of the crime. I think he's a guy that fits the public's eye level.

[Anchor]
In relation to this, former Secretary-General Yoo In-tae said in a radio interview today that he would like to resolve suspicions about Myung Tae-kyun in a little while, but Kim Gun-hee is said to have given him 5 million won in transportation expenses. In this regard, he said that this is a bigger thing compared to buying about 100,000 won of rice. What do you think about that?

[Kang Kang Ae]
I think that should be revealed through an investigation. I don't think it's just something to do with an understatement of the amount. For example, the Democratic Party of Korea continues to eat 100,000 won worth of rice, but it is not something to raise such a problem. However, in the past, when former Minister Won Hee-ryong was governor of Jeju Island, there was a vocational school under the province. I once bought a pizza worth about 200,000 won to encourage young people studying there. However, at the time, the Jeju District Court sentenced him to 900,000 won, considering that it was an act of donation. So, the amount exceeds 100,000 won and 200,000 won, and this act itself can be done as a ticket, so you have to sentence it, not just giving 5 million won and 100,000 won.

[Anchor]
What do you think of lawyer Cho Ki-yeon?

[Early Delayed]
Anyway, if you say you got paid, isn't that a quid pro quo issue for having an impact on the election if there was a deal?
The weight is incomparable. Considering the circumstances, background, and purpose of the investigation, it is not just a matter of difference in amount, and if it is prosecuted through an investigation, a much more serious punishment is expected.

[Anchor]
I see. Let's move on to the next keyword, Myung Taekyun. Let's listen to it. Please show us the next keyword. This is CEO Lee Jun-seok. Rep. Lee Joon-seok, who returned home today from an overseas business trip, met with reporters and raised suspicions that President Yoon Suk Yeol demanded the nomination of a specific mayor and a candidate for Seoul mayor in the 2022 local elections. Why did he say this? Let's listen to it.

[Anchor]
After Rep. Lee Joon-seok talked about it, he met with reporters again later, and President Yoon's demand for nomination did not materialize. I think the party leader and the presidential candidate can communicate with the president-elect to that extent. I was wary of an enlarged interpretation. Lawyer Cho Ki-yeon. Why did lawmaker Lee Joon-seok talk about that as soon as he returned home today?

[Early Delayed]
Rep. Lee Joon-seok's head seems to be complicated right now. In the early days of the suspicion of Myung Tae-kyun, as revelations and transcripts related to the president and Kim Gun-hee were released, Myung Tae-kyun continued to respond in this way. If you open what I have, impeachment, resignation, in a month. I said this before. After such pressure, at some point, he made the same remarks at a distance from the responsibility of the president and First Lady Kim Gun-hee. Just advice, good-intentioned encouragement, and can anyone recommend things like this, but isn't this target moving toward Rep. Lee Joon-seok?

Since he was the party leader in 2021 and actually exercised his nomination rights, if Myung Tae-kyun had any actions, he would have had a direct deal with the president, but of course, he would have had a relationship with Lee Joon-seok. It was more intimate, and the recent problem was caused by the revelation of the process of lawmaker Lee Joon-seok and Myung Tae-kyun's various actions ahead of the general election, right? In the process, Rep. Lee Joon-seok is now the subject of the prosecution's investigation. It's a message to the prosecution and the president's office about how to throw the card he has.

[Anchor]
I think you told me what's inside and outside of politics, but the president called for the nomination of a specific mayor. But it didn't come true. How do you see this part?

[Early Delayed]
I demanded it, a shocking revelation. And it's quite likely that it was. Through various transcripts related to Myung Tae-kyun, isn't it now said that one is Kim Young-sun, but he was also involved in the nomination of local lawmakers in return for the poll? If so, there is a possibility that lawmaker Lee Joon-seok has much more than that. But I've talked about it directly with the president, and of course, I've collected some, but I'm implicitly saying that I can talk about it at any time, it looks like this.

[Anchor]
What do you think of lawyer Kang Jeon-ae?

[Kang Kang Ae]
First of all, if you think about the fact that the president talked about a specific person, Rep. Lee Joon-seok said at a press conference with reporters after the statement, what did the president say about the suspicions related to Myung Tae-kyun, and when he received recommendations from many people, he said he just threw it right away to the party. I don't think it was part of that. And CEO Lee Joon-seok is talking about that type of story, as the lawyer said earlier, it seemed that the president and his wife were close to Myung Tae-kyun, but now CEO Lee Joon-seok talked about the nomination of lawmaker Kim Young-sun to Myung Tae-kyun after midnight. In the meantime, Rep. Lee Joon-seok said he had nothing to do with the nomination. Yoon Sang-hyun, chairman of the delegation committee, said he did it, but at 12 p.m., the problem was that the party leader did not talk to a person in the party, and Myung Tae-kyun was just a civilian other than the party. Talking to this person about the nomination itself is very contradictory to what he has stated so far. I think that's why he talked about the president in a bit of a hurry.

[Anchor]
I see. Politics on the outside and inside of politics, that's the end of today's order. So far, I've been talking with lawyer Kang Jeon-ae and lawyer Cho Ki-yeon. Thank you very much. Thank you.