Lee Jae-myung's perjury teacher is innocent of the first trial...Prosecution "No conviction, will appeal"

■ Host: Kim Sun-young Anchor
■ Starring: Rep. Bok Ki-wang of the Democratic Party of Korea, Professor Kim Geun-sik of Kyungnam University

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

[Anchor]
Let's start with a political commentary with a lively angle. Today, Professor Kim Geun-sik of Kyungnam University and Rep. Bok Ki-wang of the Democratic Party of Korea came out. Welcome. Let's look at the first keyword. a member of the Changhae family CEO Lee Jae-myung, who was acquitted in the first trial of perjury yesterday, took out these four letters in the wake of Changhae. Let's first listen to the reaction of the ruling and opposition party representatives regarding the first trial yesterday.

[Lee Jae-myung / Democratic Party leader (Yesterday): Thank you to the court for bringing back truth and justice. Although the process is very difficult and long, it is difficult for me to experience as a part of the Changhae Sea, and it is just one small rice under the big sea. Compared to the difficulties our people face, I think the difficulties I face are minimal. I would like to say that I will do my best for the better life of our people in the future, and I hope that politics is not about killing and stepping on each other, but about coexisting and going with each other. Rather than killing politics, let's do politics that saves people, I want to say to the government and the ruling party. Thank you.]

[Han Dong-hoon / Representative of the People's Power (today): There are many things I can't relate to about the ruling. I'm sure many legal professionals think so, but the justice system is a system. Nevertheless, I respect that. In the process, I think there is a high possibility that it will be straightened out within the Korean judicial system. Nevertheless, we respect the power of our people for the second trial ruling. As the Democratic Party of Korea expressed its strong support and respect for the ruling, it should also respect the November 15 prison sentence. ]

[Anchor]
We listened to the responses of the representatives of the ruling and opposition parties regarding the acquittal of the perjury teacher in the first trial. CEO Lee Jae-myung brought up a four-character idiom in Changhae. Did you prepare it in anticipation of innocence? What do you think?

[Return King]
I think I probably didn't expect it. That is why my difficulty is only narrow in the sea water. I was shocked after I was convicted in the last election law trial of the Democratic Party of Korea's leader saying that the people's livelihoods are much harder in this difficult economic situation. After that, I talked about the message that Lee Jae-myung is alive and well to the people, and expressed that it is a very small difficulty. Isn't our politics too abnormal right now? Politics has to go like politics, but policy confrontations between political parties and political competition have disappeared, and only the prosecution's attack on the opposition party remains.

And then politics is as if it's missing. The presidential office and the ruling party want to neutralize the political action itself, dismissing the opposition's political action as bulletproof. In this situation, the ruling party is not seen, only the prosecution is seen. It's such a strange look. If you look at the trial, the results of the first trial show that the prosecution has prosecuted too much, and if the results come out like this even by the second trial, the prosecution expects that the existence itself will be dangerous.

[Anchor]
It would be nice if you could show the screen after yesterday's sentence, but if it was right for me to see Park Chan-dae, the floor leader, shed tears, and Kim Min-seok, the supreme council member, was also seen crying through the screen. Did a significant number of lawmakers in the Democratic Party react like that? What do you think?

[Return King]
Everyone took a break. After that, I thought that the justice of the judiciary is still alive. That's why some people shed tears of relief, and they had a hard time encouraging each other with invisible applause. Both the representative and the lawmakers comfort each other. How long do we have to see this abnormal appearance? The beginning of the case began in 2002, and when I investigated the mobile phone of Kim Jin-sung, who questioned whether these things were perjury or not during the 2018 trial, a recording with CEO Lee came out. So you're being prosecuted again after shaking it off. It was connected like this, so it was a very abnormal event from the beginning.

[Anchor]
Representative Han Dong-hoon said, "We may not sympathize, but we will admit it, so the Democratic Party of Korea should accept the results of the first trial of the last election law. He responded like this.

[Keunsik Kim]
One of the core of democracy is the separation of powers. Then the judiciary is an independent system, so all judgments and decisions made by the judiciary must be respected. In that sense, despite the acquittal of the perjury teacher yesterday, there is something that I do not understand, but the Korean People's Power leadership, including CEO Han Dong-hoon, has always held the position that they respect the ruling. In that context, the first trial of the so-called Public Official Election Act on the 15th was convicted of one year in prison and two years of probation.

Regarding that, the Democratic Party of Korea held an outdoor rally the next day and showed a lot of resistance and opposition to the decision of the judiciary and its judges. In that context, regardless of the ruling and opposition parties, the first trial of the Public Official Election Act is guilty, so the power of the people is cheered and the Democratic Party is sad. Though the power of the people may be embarrassed and the Democratic Party may be cheering yesterday, it is necessary to respect the decision from an independent system of separation of powers called the judiciary, regardless of its advantages or disadvantages. Whether it's understandable or not is a matter of personal judgment.

[Anchor]
If I had to express the two first trials, they would say that it's one win and one loss. [Kim Geunsik] I thought it was going to be a two-out game yesterday, but it ended in one out, so it's 1 win and 1 loss.Ma has 2 more trials left. There are still areas that can be contested in the second trial, but the Democratic Party believes that there is room for another dispute on the Democratic Party's side, and we humbly watch the results of the second trial because we have room for dispute on our side. Anyway, what we would like to ask the Democratic Party to do is to respect the judiciary's judgment.

[Anchor]
After the acquittal yesterday, many people said that. Isn't it similar to when Lee Jae-myung's warrant was rejected last year? With such a dramatic reversal effect, Lee Jae-myung's grip will be stronger.

[Keunsik Kim]
In a cool way, isn't this the lightest and simplest of the various judicial risks that representative Lee Jae-myung holds? Behind the scenes, there's a trial that's facing more serious charges.E. As you said, these two things came out, and one was guilty and the other was innocent. Looking at CEO Lee Jae-myung's personal history and personal life journey, he seems to have made a very dramatic twist every time. I think it can be seen as a very persistent life and a life like a rotuk.

He was born to a very poor family from an early age and suffered from it, became a judicial examination, and after a civic movement in Seongnam City, he became mayor of Seongnam City and became governor of Gyeonggi-do Province. In the process of becoming a governor of Gyeonggi-do Province, there were ups and downs when he was actually sentenced to invalidity of election in the second trial due to false disclosure of false information of the Public Official Election Act.Ma's so-called approval of the arrest agreement last year led to the atmosphere that the Democratic Party of Korea's arrest warrant was also passed.Ma also has a process of dramatically reviving at that time, so I think it's quite turbulent from the perspective of such a personal history. But it remains to be seen whether that will become political momentum afterwards or how it will change from next year's second-judgment.

[Anchor]
There are various interpretations from the ruling and opposition parties over the first trial ruling of perjury teachers yesterday. Rep. Jung Sung-ho and Rep. Joo Jin-woo, let's hear what analysis they did.

[Jung Sung-ho / Rep. of the Democratic Party (MBC Kim Jong-bae's attention)] If you look at the contents of the case, this is a case where you can't get a prison sentence. What the defendant, Kim Jin-sung, testified was actually 16 years and 17 years before the testimony at that time. And the testimony had no effect on the case, the violation of the Public Official Election Act, and the dissemination of false information by Gyeonggi Province Governor Lee Jae-myung. That's why I thought that the worst-case scenario, even the worst-case scenario, cannot pass the fine. (Have you talked with Representative Lee Jae-myung after the verdict came out? ) I sent you a long message last night. I sent a message about what I would like to do in the future, and he sent me a heart after reading it. ]

[Joo Jin-woo / People's Power (CBS Kim Hyun-jung's news show): I think there is a good chance that the second trial will overturn. In the second trial, you don't do the same thing that you did in the first trial. So, if you ask for a lot of witnesses in the first trial and say you did a lot of things, it doesn't turn the tables well even if you call one or two witnesses in the second trial. I think the interpretation of this recording file is a little unique to me. Because it's a ruling that can have a significant impact on other courts. So if this case does not affect other trials, in fact, the judgment of this individual court can be respected, which, according to this judgment, makes way for those who perjure or teach perjure in the future. ]

[Anchor]
After this first trial ruling, it is the closest aide to Representative Jung Sung-ho and Representative Lee Jae-myung. I texted him and he said he got a heart, what does it mean in that heart? It means

[Revival King]
Thank you, thank you, thank you. If Cherry Ttabong said good job, this is thank you, thank you.

[Anchor]
Rep. Bok Gi Wang, have you received hearts?

[Return King]
I text each other when I have an issue, but I don't think there was a heart.

[Anchor]
What kind of feelings do you think we conveyed to each other?

[Return King]
Thank you very much for the common sense judgment and you suffered. And wouldn't lawmaker Jung Sung-ho have given various advice on the arguments? I think he said he talked about those things, so he said, "You've worked hard on that." It's funny to see this incident. Because of this, CEO Lee Jae-myung has a criminal record. In the end, Kim Byung-ryang, the mayor of Seongnam at the time, was accused of receiving a third-party donation and some kind of bribe in connection with the Bundang Park View sale case.

The beginning of the world's lively investigation began when a civic activist named Lee Jae-myung and a KBS PD became known to the world through such reports. At that time, Kim Byung-ryang did not touch the prosecutor properly, but rather punished and arrested only KBS PD and lawyer Lee Jae-myung. That's how it started. In the end, Kim Byung-ryang was convicted of one year in prison and two years of probation, and I think this is a decisive case of oppression of the political opponent in such a narrow way because he has judicial vested interests as much as the last presidential election.

Nevertheless, I really appreciate the judge's just judgment. I want you to look back on yourself on how fair the prosecutor Joo Jin-woo was when he was a prosecutor. There are various suspicions related to you. So it's good to say what you want.If Ma is at least the ruling party, I would like to advise you to be more careful and cautious about remarks that may affect the judgment of the judiciary. [Anchor] We organized the first trial's sentence in graphic form yesterday. Please show us. So the conclusion is that perjury is guilty and perjury teachers are not guilty.

[Keunsik Kim]
In that part, I am not a legal professional, but from the level of common sense, Kim Jin-sung was perjured, and the court fined him because it judged that two of the six testimony were innocent, but four were guilty and that he should be punished severely. However, the person who taught me was acquitted because he was not intentional. However, I read the court's ruling carefully, and while explaining the four testimonies that Kim Jin-sung perjured against his memory, the contents of those four testimonies were imagined to be on the phone with Lee Jae-myung, then governor of Gyeonggi-do Province, and he gave false testimonies reflecting that. So it seems that the influence was clearly affected, and I admit that there was teaching behavior in the judgment.

So I asked for a teacher, and I talked on the phone. So I admitted that there was a teaching act, but as if it came out there. However, I made the judgment that I was innocent because I didn't intend to, so I think there is enough room for dispute in the second trial. If you look at it in common sense, we see it a lot in dramas.Ma, when the chairman of a chaebol or a powerful person is indicted by the prosecution and tried, he or she makes false testimony to those who are weaker or less powerful than him. Are you making me do it then? If you tell me on your own, you'll know on your own. So, when Kim Jin-sung spoke to Lee Jae-myung, the governor of Gyeonggi-do Province, at the time, he was the incumbent governor.

And if you listen to the 30-minute phone call, Kim Jin-sung keeps saying, "I don't know how to express this, but let's meet together and have a meal together." Because Kim Jin-sung was a developer of the Baekhyun-dong case. Isn't there a person who was the head of Lee Jae-myung's camp at the time? I was working with him. So, because he was the governor of Gyeonggi-do Province at the time, he had a strong real power, so there was a need to look good. So I think there's a possibility that you've accepted enough of that, even if you didn't deliberately and explicitly ask me to do this. Nevertheless, when the ruling came out anyway, he admitted that he was not intentional, so I look forward to the prosecution's appeal again in the second trial, and then another ruling by the second trial court.

[Anchor]
He said that he personally sees room for another dispute at the appeal trial. Anyway, CEO Lee Jae-myung passed the perjury teacher hurdle yesterday, but the election law-related hehet came out quite heavy in the first trial. What kind of strategy do you think CEO Lee Jae-myung will plan in the future?

[Return King]
We say that we were caught off guard. He argued that it was impossible to punish Kim Moon-ki for this memory, whether he knew him or not. It's not that, but with other stories on the show, this is a false fact, but there are precedents related to that. Looking at those things, we are interpreting that this should be innocent, but it was judged because it was too politically influenced. Even if it's guilty, the prosecution is the best...

[Anchor]
The doctor's voice is not in good condition, so drink some water.

[Return King]
Didn't you ask for a sentence with the maximum aggravated punishment and give the maximum sentence accordingly? Even if it is guilty, it is common sense to be fined at a level that is not affected by parliamentary seats of less than 1 million won, as the general ruling is not intended to defeat others but to plead me.

[Anchor]
For example, in the case of an election law amendment, is it in the scenario? [King of retro] It has nothing to do with that. Even if the election law is revised, it is subject to the current election law and is a trial, so it has nothing to do with the revision. However, until now, I have not seen a false fact for the purpose of promoting oneself, a judgment so severe that it would lose its parliamentary seat, unless it was a false academic background or something like this. Therefore, it is basically predicted that at least the sentencing and the guilty part will move greatly at the second trial. Wouldn't the current ruling of the first trial be maintained in the second trial? Of course, the wishes between political parties and supporters will be contained in the words. I believe that our argument is justice.

[Anchor]
It's a hurdle in front of Representative Lee Jae-myung, who has perjury and the election law is even sentenced to the Supreme Court. First of all, from the perspective of representative Lee Jae-myung, if we can overcome the election law, wouldn't we be able to run for president? So, some people keep talking about suggesting a proposal to the Constitutional Court for an unconstitutional trial or revising the election law to put some pressure on the judiciary. How do you see that?

[Keunsik Kim]
I don't know if the Democratic Party already proposed an amendment to the election law last time, so it was secretly proposed as well.Didn't Ma do it the day before the first trial of the Lee Jae-myung Public Official Election Act? Everyone criticized that it was a trick to anyone and that it was showing excessive loyalty to CEO Lee Jae-myung. The latest story is, of course, we'll go to the second trial and fight for guilt.If you make a request for an unconstitutional legal trial to neutralize it altogether, you don't know what will happen during that period if it is cited by the Constitutional Court and a judicial hearing is conducted.

[Anchor]
The trial will be suspended, right?

[Keunsik Kim]
There's an interpretation that's possible and that's not the case.It's the first time Ma has ever happened. If the defendant who is being tried is to exert pressure on the unconstitutional trial by using the power of the majority party he is leading just because there is a problem with the law related to him or the law that prosecutes him, I think it will not be easy to go against the public sentiment, and I don't think it should be. The most justifiable way is to believe in the judicial system and, as Representative Bok said earlier in the second trial, I think we can fight again for innocence in the second trial. However, the first trial's Public Official Election Act was guilty and innocent, but the second trial would argue for guilt or innocence, but this time, there was perjury at the common sense level of the general public, but there was no teacher.

There is a dispute over this part because it is ambiguous that there was an act of teaching but not intentional.Ma said that the first trial of the Public Official Election Act was difficult to change because it was a matter of perception that the Democratic Party of Korea did not know Kim Moon-ki. The court acknowledged that. Yeah, that's innocent. But something else is guilty. So maybe the Democratic Party should think of a new argument. So there's a possibility that the 1st and 2nd trials will change.From our perspective, Ma thinks that it is difficult to change the conviction of the first trial of the Public Official Election Act in the second trial.

[Anchor]
Briefly. Lawmaker Jung Sung-ho said that today. I didn't know Kim Moon-ki, I don't remember. I focused too much on this part and planned the trial strategy, so I went with a strange trend of saying that I didn't play golf, but I thought I could change my appeal strategy. What do you think?

[Return King]
As I said earlier, punishment by memory is impossible. That's why I made my argument based on that. Someone was acquitted of that part and claimed that he played golf on the rest of the broadcast, but only 4 people and 4 members who played golf took it, so isn't it a kind of photo manipulation? I did this as if I was playing golf. I didn't say I didn't hit it. I didn't know that this was a false statement that these four manipulated the picture as if they were playing golf. However, regarding that, there is a precedent that the Supreme Court's precedent clearly states that this part is innocent. However, the judge must have seen the precedent clearly, but if he didn't, I think it would be more acceptable in that regard by going to the second trial. I'm preparing for the 2nd trial with that expectation. We are currently waiting and preparing for a just judgment on both cases in the second trial, thinking it is zero base.

[Keunsik Kim]
We have 1 win and 1 loss.Ma has two more trials left. Then, since the larger corruption trial that is going on now is likely to drag on, CEO Lee Jae-myung said that if the second trial and the 633 rule are followed next spring, if the Supreme Court comes out before the end of next year.If I interpret this in a different way, there are a lot of tsunami of enormous judicial risks in front of Representative Lee Jae-myung. In the midst of a tsunami, the first trial of perjury teacher is only one of them. So, I make it clear that Lee Jae-myung's judicial risk still exists, and depending on whether it is, it remains high that he will be convicted of deprivation of his right to run for election and at the time of his conviction as a presidential candidate.

[Anchor]
We just showed you a graphic.Ma should pay attention again this week, with the final ruling by Kim In-seop, a lobbyist in Baekhyun-dong, and the appeals court for former lieutenant governor Lee Hwa-young coming out this time.

[Keunsik Kim]
That's right. Isn't it all connected? I didn't remember the name before. The trial has already begun and will be finalized this week for Kim In-seop's four-step upgrade in relation to Baekhyun-dong. In fact, if the Supreme Court is finalized, the trial related to Lee Jae-myung's corruption in Baekhyun-dong will proceed slowly, but if Kim In-seop, who is already an accomplice with the case, is convicted in the Supreme Court, it will have an impact. And the people will think the same. The first trial also sentenced Lee Hwa-young, vice governor of peace in Gyeonggi Province, to nine years and six months in heavy transfer to North Korea, which is scheduled for the 29th. If Lee Jae-myung is found guilty again on the 29th and is found guilty again in connection with the remittance to North Korea, which is indicated as an accomplice in the guilty part, it will be enough for the people to have the conviction that Lee Jae-myung's original case is guilty even if it is too late.

[Anchor]
Member for Bokkiwang, briefly. First of all, there is time until the appeal trial, and the acquittal yesterday will increase Chairman Lee Jae-myung's control within the party. These prospects are coming out, and the Democratic Party of Korea is expected to rein in its rental offensive in the future, what kind of moves do you expect?

[Return King]
It will be more popular than the party's control. Lee Jae-myung was so unfair, he's being suppressed.

[Anchor]
Lee's approval rating will go up?

[Return King]
If that happens, the party's control will naturally increase, and the leadership centered on Lee Jae-myung will go unwavering. He is not swayed more in relation to the ongoing Special Prosecutor Kim Gun-hee Act. I vetoed it today, but the decision was made at the Cabinet meeting and the conclusion was followed. Nevertheless, we are right to say that we will not miss the Kim Gun-hee Special Prosecutor Act, which is supported by more than 70 percent of the people. Since the things that Lee Jae-myung's leadership is right have been proven, I think the Democratic Party and the Korean people, who are critical of the Yoon Suk Yeol's state administration, will have a stronger sentiment to go strong around Lee Jae-myung.

I think yesterday's case of CEO Lee Jae-myung was a case 20 years ago, and a case that testified in court four years ago. I even brought up these things, forcibly prosecuted them, and there was never a case like the election law. Lee Jae-myung is on trial for being involved in all related cases because he was the mayor at the time. The tragedy of our political history, which would not happen if we did not compete with the former prosecutor general, is going on, and I think the President of Yoon Suk Yeol will be paid for this in any way possible.

[Anchor]
In any case, apart from Lee Jae-myung's judicial risk, the atmosphere inside the people's power is quite chaotic. Please show us the next keyword. I'm talking about this again. Is the 3rd Kim Ok-gyun project in operation? Within the power of the people, there are talks about bringing down Han Dong-hoon and being systematically carried out. Can you see a series of movements like that?

[Keunsik Kim]
It seems that the leadership, including CEO Han Dong-hoon, is quite sensitive about the flow. Personally, it's been a few weeks since the party bulletin board controversy began.Ma was a minor problem in a way. It's the 3rd Kim Ok Gyun project.It seems highly probable that Ma has seen systematic movements by certain forces to shake up representative Han Dong-hoon and bring down representative Han Dong-hoon. For example, it's like that. The article continued to expand as some far-right YouTubers raised issues related to the party's bulletin board, and some forces in the party took the issues and expanded and reproduced them without filtering. All of those contents have been rejected. First, Han Dong-hoon cursed beyond words. It's confirmed that's not it.

Second, writing in the name of Han Dong-hoon's family is also very serious. However, after a thorough investigation, I also saw more than 1,000 posts in the name of Han Dong-hoon's family, and it was confirmed that there was nothing wrong with it, such as articles, columns, or editorials, or encouragement or political claims. Third, they say they manipulated public opinion.Public opinion manipulation is manipulated if there was no public opinion criticizing President Yoon Suk Yeol or First Lady Kim Gun-hee on the party bulletin board by turning the macro, but since these people posted dozens of cases, it would be manipulated if public opinion changed.Even when Ma had not already posted in their name, most of the party had already raised the issue of Kim Gun-hee. It's not a manipulation of public opinion at all. So what's the final conclusion they're arguing for? I'm asking Han Dong-hoon to resign.

So I think this has already been rejected because a series of four arguments create a problem even though there is nothing wrong with it. However, since all of these things have been impeached and turned out to be untrue, the last thing left is to ask whether the family used them or not, but even when I've experienced it, when representative Han Dong-hoon argued about the ruling-opposition parliamentary consultative body, he argued why Yongsan's response to it spilled it to the media and demanded a meeting with the president, and he argued why he spilled it to the media when he talked about the risk of Kim Gun-hee. So, it's avoiding the essence with non-essential issues that are not important. The essence of revealing whether the family wrote it or not is different, but it is shaking with the non-essence of whether it was used or not, not this. That's what I judge.

[Anchor]
The party is saying that the controversy over the party's bulletin board is not the essence, but that it will eventually bring down Han Dong-hoon. Let's listen to former Supreme Council member Jang Ye-chan and Supreme Council member Jang Dong-hyuk, who are even discussing the resignation of CEO Han Dong-hoon.

[Jang Ye-chan / Supreme Council member of the People's Power (Yesterday, CBS Park Jae-hong's match) :( Why do you keep asking me this? Did you use it or not? This is a very important fact-finding mission. And if. (What should I do if I used it? ) If you wrote it. In fact, it is a simple problem to see that the problem has become this big compared to last week and two weeks ago. The political responsibility for continuing to change words, being silent, and bringing them this far is rising even more. Political leaders must always be honest in the face of a given question and have a duty to be honest about what they can confirm. Representative Han Dong-hoon should take heavy political responsibility for that. ]

[Jang Dong-hyuk / Supreme Council Member of People's Power (SBS Kim Tae-hyun's Political Show): (Do you think it's a pro-Yoon-gye counterattack to regain hegemony within the party? ) I can't say I'm pro-Yoon-gye. (Then the president's office? ) The presidential office or wherever. Anyway, the intention of those who continue to attack is not to at least try to make some party bulletin board work well in the future through this (then the purpose of bringing down the party leader). Are you going this far? Looking at the remarks of former Supreme Council member Jang Ye-chan, isn't he continuously talking about the political life of representative Han Dong-hoon? I think that's the end goal. At least, even if it does not reach that, I think the goal is to eventually scratch CEO Han Dong-hoon's leadership and tie CEO Han Dong-hoon's mouth or hands and feet. ]

[Anchor]
Isn't it Kim Ok-gyun project to bring down Han Dong-hoon? There are talks about this in the close circle, but when it comes to project, it means that there is a background behind it.

[Return King]
Right. There's a plan behind it. This is the third operation, and it's important whether it actually provided an excuse or not. Because they claim that many other impeachments were made earlier, but even so, did CEO Han Dong-hoon actually write such a comment? I wonder if CEO Han Dong-hoon's family used it. So it's definitely not a non-essential part. Representative Han Dong-hoon and his family directly criticized President Yoon Suk Yeol and First Lady Kim Gun-hee. Aren't the people involved in the power of the people actually very angry about this? He can't clearly draw a line that he's not representative Han Dong-hoon, and if you look at the posts, he makes excuses that they're not various editorials.

Then, according to what you hear, you suspect that CEO Han Dong-hoon or his family members did it, and doesn't CEO Han Dong-hoon have suspicions that he ran a comment team in the past? So, there are more than 1,000 comments, and the debate over whether Han Dong-hoon used a macro or not is leading to a debate about whether Han Dong-hoon is innocent, but if his family did it neatly, it would be wrong. You can't do it. Even if you want to say something, you can't say it. Then, if there is a clear confession about that part and morally criticized for that part, then the debate will end, but it continues to stretch because I'm not doing it.

[Keunsik Kim]
If I tell you that part, I think you should someday reveal whether your family wrote it or not. But it's not the essence at this stage. Regarding the first white paper for the general election, there was a ridiculous Kim Ok-gyun project in the Yeouido Institute poll that Han Dong-hoon spent his party expenses on his own. Next, while talking about the controversy over Kim Gun-hee's reading and chewing, there is a second project in which our party's national convention is completely stained with negativity. Since the party's bulletin board is talking about where the essence is and whether the family wrote it or not, I am telling Han Dong-hoon to reveal it at some point personally after we hold the public's spirit on the basis of public sentiment.

[Anchor]
Professor, I'm sorry to interrupt you. So anyway, it's right to not give a clear answer for too long, and some say that CEO Han Dong-hoon tacitly acknowledged it, but he's planning something big while buying time like this. There is also an interpretation that something is being netted. Which do you think is more likely?

[Keunsik Kim]
Some say they're getting ready to hit back.Ma needs to look at the facts. So I don't have a weapon as powerful as honesty in politics. So, I think CEO Han Dong-hoon should reveal whether the family wrote or not in the name of the family. Nevertheless, as Rep. Bok said, can't the family use it? This is different. I'm a member of the party before I'm a family member. And it's like a bamboo forest where anonymity is guaranteed. So, even if I were like myself at the time, wouldn't my family or my wife who cared about me get angry if I came out and was humiliated by the president? However, there is a moral problem if you say it publicly, but there is a moral problem with writing what you want to say anonymously on the bulletin board of a party member? It might not be.

[Return King]
It can be something that looks very embarrassing and squishy.

[Keunsik Kim]
It is necessary to express regret for causing a stir in itself, but the family is so frustrated that the king's ears are donkey ears, and Mrs. Kim Gun-hee is really bad. There is a legal problem with telling stories like this because anonymity is guaranteed. It is too much to say that there is a moral problem.

[Anchor]
Finally, I'll wrap this up. Then if you do all of this and it turns out to be a family. Then, does CEO Han Dong-hoon really have to resign? What should I do?

[Return King]
It would depend on the party situation. Basically, you'll have to apologize.

[Anchor]
What do you think of that as the pro-Yoon side tells you to take political responsibility apart from the apology?

[Return King]
That part will be judged by the political dynamics of the party, and this case can be terminated by bowing to the people and apologizing to the members. I don't think it can shake the position of the ruling party leader.

[Keunsik Kim]
Finally, if it is confirmed that the family wrote it, it is not a problem, but I can say sorry for causing a stir anyway. However, this is not a big problem... It's not a problem right now for Mrs. Kim Gun-hee. Let me be clear about that.

[Anchor]
It's almost time, so I have to briefly mention this issue as well. Kim Gun-hee's Special Prosecutor Act. If the veto was exercised today, it would be re-voting, but the Democratic Party was wondering if it would postpone the re-voting date. Why is that?

[Return King]
Originally, a plenary session was scheduled on the 28th, but I thought it would be done then, but the more this perception spreads, the more disadvantageous it is in the power of the people. So, after a little more time, there were four people leaving last time, but we are expecting that more people will leave.

[Anchor]
If representative Han Dong-hoon continues to operate the Kim Ok-kyun project in the party due to the issue of bulletin boards, he seems to have a political imagination that his mind can lean toward passing the special prosecution.

[Keunsik Kim]
You shouldn't do political engineering like that. You have to be honest as you are. The current situation seems clear that there is an organized force to bring down CEO Han Dong-hoon. So, we can fight confidently and overcome that part, but I think we can check whether there was a post in the name of our family and reveal it as it is in front of the people, as Representative Bok said earlier.

[Anchor]
If the re-voting date is delayed according to the Democratic Party's calculation method, we will have to see if there will be more leave votes. Professor Kim Geun-sik of Kyungnam University and Bok Ki-wang of the Democratic Party of Korea were two lawmakers. Thank you.