President Yoon's 4th recall notice, will he respond to the 'Exclamation Day investigation'?

■ Host: Anchor Yoon Jae-hee
■ Starring: Jang Young-soo, professor of law at Korea University

* 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]
The Joint Investigation Headquarters has again asked President Yoon Suk Yeol to attend. We are interested in whether a Christmas investigation will take place on the morning of the 25th. The Constitutional Court's impeachment trial process has also begun, and let's take a closer look at the legal issues. I will join Professor Jang Young-soo of Korea University Law School. The Korea Communications Standards Commission sent a second request for attendance to President Yoon, but the first one did not respond. What do you think it will be like this time?

[Jang Young-soo]
I have to go first, but I don't think it's very likely that I'll respond this time. The reason for not responding may vary little by little, but if you look at the current attitude of President Yoon Suk Yeol, it is not appropriate for him to summon an investigative agency to do a visit investigation. I think that's what you're thinking.

[Anchor]
Could it be one of the reasons for not attending that the lawyers were not formed?

[Jang Young-soo]
That's true in terms of defense. However, it is difficult to do so indefinitely just because the formation of the lawyers is delayed. Therefore, the defense team has not already been completed, but it is known that the entire defense team does not have to be present, so that part will be weak in persuasion.

[Anchor]
There has been criticism about the confusion of investigative agencies. Now that we have been transferred to the Senior Civil Servant Corruption Investigations Unit, there is no controversy over this, right?

[Jang Young-soo]
I'm afraid not. First of all, the prosecution did not enter the fence of its own, called a joint investigation. In other words, it was just a case transfer, but what to do afterwards is another matter. Another thing is that there is no control tower even within the joint investigation headquarters. As a result, there is a concern that internal conflicts will arise at any time and it will be difficult to resolve them. Another thing is that if a special prosecutor is established under the Special Prosecutor Act, it will be a problem in the relationship with you. So there's still a lot of social workers. That's the situation.

[Anchor]
Whether President Yoon will receive the request for attendance is also important. In the case of the first request, it was sent through a person, but it was denied receipt. The president had mentioned that he would take legal responsibility. There are criticisms that it looks different from that.

[Jang Young-soo]
However, I also think that President Yoon's use of such a strategy to delay the investigation or trial is to see and learn from the delay of Lee Jae-myung's trial.

[Anchor]
The media continues to discuss the possibility of a forced investigation if they refuse to comply with the summons. First of all, what do you think of the possibility as a professor?

[Jang Young-soo]
There are two reasons why I don't think it's high. First, the fact that the current president stands in a criminal court is a disgrace to the nation to prevent criminal prosecution of an incumbent president under Article 84 of the Constitution. But isn't forced investigation a more serious national disgrace than that? This is one point.

In fact, in the case of France, the constitution has a nail in it that the incumbent president cannot even conduct a summons investigation. And secondly, a warrant is eventually required for forced investigation, and the basic requirement for issuing such a warrant is the fear of escape or destruction of evidence. However, President Yoon will not be able to escape from Korea right now.

If you think about running abroad, you've already banned your departure, but it doesn't make sense to say that. Speaking of destroying evidence, I've already missed the timing. It's already been a few days since the story of rebellion came out, so would we leave the relevant evidence as it is? How much did you get rid of? It's something you can think about. If so, it will be a question of whether it is appropriate to issue a warrant and conduct an arrest investigation in that way at this point.

[Anchor]
Since there are issues such as national qualifications mentioned above, I think we should think about a reasonable method through a visit survey.

[Jang Young-soo]
I feel the same way. As I said earlier, it is highly likely that President Yoon is also thinking that I should be treated with this kind of respect because I am the incumbent president.

[Anchor]
If an arrest warrant is issued symbolically, wouldn't there be a conflict with the security service or something like this?

[Jang Young-soo]
The problem can be solved in a sense, because if the security agency makes an emergency arrest, it is an illegal arrest without meeting the requirements of this emergency arrest. However, if you get a warrant from the court, it is difficult to deny the court then. You can say it's due process. Stopping this can interfere with the execution of official duties, so it's probably hard for the security service.

[Anchor]
What if President Yoon's side asks for more time to guarantee defense rights because of the appointment of lawyers and these issues? Will it be acceptable?

[Jang Young-soo]
The Constitutional Court will have to judge that. So this time should have done enough. If you think it's for dragging your feet, you may not accept it. In light of the seriousness of the issue and such, for example, a week can be given. You can judge it like this. It depends on the judgment of the Constitutional Court.

[Anchor]
Whether there was an order for the arrest of a lawmaker in connection with the investigation into the alleged rebellion is also a very controversial issue, and Seok Dong-hyun, a lawyer for President Yoon, has never given such an order. Didn't you say that the body of the arrest never told you? In this way, it is very similar to the president's statement in some ways. This analysis is coming out, what do you think?

[Jang Young-soo]
In the position of President Yoon, the crime of rebellion can never be admitted, except for emergency martial law. And in that regard, I can't talk about anything else because I'm defending President Yoon's position. However, the question is which side's argument will be supported in the future on the part where the arguments are conflicting. That will eventually determine the decision of the Constitutional Court.

[Anchor]
There are also testimonies from officials at the time, which are different from the president's position. I put related contents in my voice. Let's listen to it first.

[Anchor]
Professor, but the problem is that there is only a statement and there is no evidence such as a recording. How should I make a judgment in this state?

[Jang Young-soo]
Criminal proceedings apply to impeachment trials. In other words, you have to check and secure evidence very strictly. In that case, criminal punishment cannot be imposed on the basis of one when there are mixed statements. Because it's a serious issue with the crime of rebellion, we'll have to secure additional evidence in the end. The testimonies that have been made so far, or statements, are not enough.

For example, whether there is solid evidence in server searches, these things will be a problem, but if not, what specific instructions did the martial law forces or police forces that were mobilized receive? We will have no choice but to check these things one by one and determine which statement is convincing and close to the truth in the context.

[Anchor]
So, we are also trying to search and seizure of the presidential office, but it is being blocked by the security service. Isn't there a way to solve this part?

[Jang Young-soo]
Apart from the direction that can be resolved, as I said earlier, even if there was relevant evidence, it would have been discarded earlier. I missed the timing, it's right to see it like that. In fact, there are so many people involved in this, so if you combine the relevant facts in various ways, there will be various scattered pieces, so I think the key is to find and connect them well.

[Anchor]
There is also a controversy over former civilian officials in connection with the investigation into the alleged insurrection. Roh Sang-won, the former intelligence commander, is particularly pointed out as the reason behind the martial law incident, and if civilians are found to be guilty of conspiracy to commit martial law, they will be subject to considerable punishment. What do you think?

[Jang Young-soo]
However, it is difficult to call martial law conspiracy itself. Because there is no martial law itself, right? Just because civilians without martial law have plotted martial law, there is no possibility that it can be implemented directly, and there is no criminal restraint requirement related to it. In other words, it is difficult to punish this on its own, according to the principle of criminal courtism. But the problem here is that if this doesn't actually end up in emergency martial law and leads to civil war, and if it's recognized as a conspiracy of civil war, then there's a possibility that it could be punished for civil war.

[Anchor]
Now, in the case of a special police team, Acting President Han Deok-soo also conducted a private investigation. We are investigating 9 out of 12 people who attended the Cabinet meeting when the emergency martial law was issued, so what contents did they investigate?

[Jang Young-soo]
First of all, I'm trying to find out what specific stories came and went at the Cabinet meeting, and who was in favor of it and who was against it, and whether there is something like this that can be held accountable for it. Personally, I think it is unreasonable to enter the public from the current state.

[Anchor]
Last time, acting Han Deok-soo also mentioned about the Cabinet meeting that there was a flaw in the procedure. I think we need a considerable review of this part.

[Jang Young-soo]
However, I have a slightly different idea. In order to properly declare emergency martial law, the president should have considered the decision made after deliberation at the Cabinet meeting. In that respect, it is criticized that it is not proper, but even if it is not, it is generally recognized that emergency martial law is unconstitutional and illegal.

The civil war issue and the emergency martial law issue are separate, and the emergency martial law itself was not a state of emergency stipulated in Article 77, Paragraph 1 of the Constitution, nor was it possible to maintain public well-being only by mobilizing troops. This in itself was unconstitutional. In other words, emergency martial law is still unconstitutional even if the Cabinet meeting has no procedural defects. In this regard, I don't think the impact of defects in the procedure of the State Council is relatively significant.

[Anchor]
Since it was decided that some of the investigations, which had been divided into various branches, would be transferred to a collaborative copy by the prosecution, it was divided into two branches. In the meantime, didn't the prosecution forcefully investigate the National Investigation Headquarters? At the same time, some point out that the legitimacy of the investigation itself may arise. What is your position on this?

[Jang Young-soo]
But in the first place, wasn't the collaboration between the military, the police, and the three agencies of the Airborne Division? I don't know why you took out the prosecution. However, in the meantime, the organization and manpower are too weak in the case of the Senior Civil Servant Corruption Investigations Unit. I'm getting this kind of evaluation. In the case of the military and police, it was mobilized for martial law in the first place, which is why self-investigation has been a problem, so there is a fundamental limitation there.

Rather, in that respect, I think attracting the prosecution and working together could have helped to dispel the people's self-investigation problems. But since they don't do that, for example, in the case of Kook Soo-bon, the police are also in trouble with Commissioner Jo Ji-ho. There are concerns about whether they are actually investigating properly or trying to protect my family, so don't touch the prosecution about it, it's hard to say we'll take care of it.

[Anchor]
Anyway, the right to prosecute is only in the prosecution, so isn't it a situation that comes back?

[Jang Young-soo]
After the special prosecutor is activated, the special prosecutor can prosecute that part.

[Anchor]
Is there a possibility that the investigation will be combined before the special prosecutor is activated because it may take a long time for it to be activated?

[Jang Young-soo]
For now, I think everything is open. However, from the prosecution's point of view, if they said they would do so, they didn't give it to them as a copy, but they transferred it to the Senior Civil Servant Corruption Investigations Unit. The Senior Civil Servant Corruption Investigations Unit asked for a transfer and gave it to me to take it, but I think the Senior Civil Servant Corruption Investigations Unit, which lacks manpower and expertise, can do it if you think like this. And in the case of the special prosecutor, it will take time because it presupposes a very large-scale composition.

[Anchor]
I think that's a matter to watch. The Constitutional Court's impeachment proceedings against President Yoon Suk Yeol have also begun. However, in the case of the president, he is not even receiving documents related to the impeachment trial. The preparation date is scheduled for the 27th of next week, can this proceed properly?

[Jang Young-soo]
should look. The documents and the lawyers are still not fully prepared. Since this continues to be argued, the Constitutional Court has said that it will resolve the refusal to receive documents through public service or other methods. As I said earlier, the issue of the formation of the defense team can be given a little more time if it is judged that time is really insufficient, but it cannot be prolonged indefinitely.

[Anchor]
The Constitutional Court will announce its position on delivery next Monday, so what cards can we offer?

[Jang Young-soo]
For example, if you post it on the bulletin board because it's a public service delivery, and you've seen it all, it's considered to have been served after two weeks. Or even if you don't hand it to yourself, you can leave it in the office or at home and think of it as a kindergarten service, and eventually you can do things like this as your own.

[Anchor]
Is it considered to have been received just by placing it in the location?

[Jang Young-soo]
If it's delivered to a trusted person, it's considered indirect in the end, even if it's not you.

[Anchor]
This part will be announced on Monday. I think we'll have to wait and see. However, some pointed out this part of the president's various investigations and delays in the trial schedule. According to Article 51 of the Constitutional Court Act, if criminal proceedings are underway for the same reason as the impeachment trial, the impeachment trial can be suspended. Because of this, some point out that the impeachment trial will be extended later.

[Jang Young-soo]
Article 51 is that the Constitutional Court can make its own judgment, not that it should. And what's important here is that if you wait for a big and complicated case called the crime of rebellion to come out of the court's final ruling, President Yoon's term could be over. If that happens, it will be difficult for the people, not to mention the opposition party, to understand.

Therefore, the Constitutional Court will probably not do so and the Constitutional Court will start hearing immediately, but one thing to note here is that this case will be decided by the Constitutional Court and then it will go back to the court later, right? However, if the Constitutional Court decides whether or not to commit rebellion and the court's judgment are mixed, legal confusion will intensify at this time.

Furthermore, because the impeachment trial is a criminal procedure that applies mutatis mutandis, it was a different civil procedure here, so it's hard to make this excuse. It is very likely that the Constitutional Court will conduct evidence investigations and such thoroughly so that they will not be broken even when they go to the court. Then, it may take a little more time, and I think we should consider this.

[Anchor]
That's all for today. I was with Jang Young-soo, a professor at Korea University's law school. Thank you for talking with me today.