[New Square 2PM] Kim Yong-hyun's "No Insurrection"... President Yoon, should we say our position in person?

■ Host: anchor Lee Se-na, anchor Na Kyung-chul
■ Starring: Kim Hyung-joon, chair professor at Baejae University, lawyer Son Jeong-hye

* The text below may differ from the actual broadcast content, so please check the broadcast for more accurate information. Please specify [YTN New Square 2PM] when quoting.

[Anchor]
The Constitutional Court held a meeting of judges today, a day before the first hearing of President Yoon's impeachment trial. Acting Han Deok-soo held a public statement a little while ago and said that the ruling and opposition parties will agree on the appointment of constitutional judges first, and that the appointment of constitutional judges will be put on hold. You also heard the Democratic Party's position on this. Today, we will be joined by Kim Hyung-joon, chair professor of Baejae University, and lawyer Son Jung-hye. Please come in. Before talking with the two of you, new news just broke out. First of all, acting president Han Deok-soo said that he cannot appoint a constitutional judge without an agreement between the ruling and opposition parties. He then heard the Democratic Party's position a little while ago, but the Democratic Party proposes an impeachment motion against acting Han Deok-soo above all else. That's what I said. Professor, how did you hear it?

[KIM HYEONGJUN]
What Acting President Han Deok-soo has been talking about so far can be abbreviated in two ways. One is that we have continued to say that we will judge according to the Constitution and laws through agreement between the ruling and opposition parties. Second, while talking about it, didn't the ruling and opposition parties agree on the operation of the ruling and opposition party-government consultative body at the same time?

We decided to have our first meeting today, but the meeting itself can't be established. So, I said that it would be good for the ruling and opposition parties to reach an agreement on a very important issue and for the National Assembly speaker to manage it. Judging very objectively now, both the ruling and opposition parties have many contradictions on their own. For example, in the case of the ruling party, they say that the right to veto should be exercised and not the right to appoint.

On the contrary, the Democratic Party of Korea says that it should not exercise its veto power, but that it should exercise its right to appoint. So, the role of acting Han Deok-soo according to their own interests. What this means is that since we are in an unprecedented situation in the Constitution, there is no exact regulation on the extent to which the acting president can exercise his or her authority. As a result, it is said that they are now filing an impeachment motion against the acting president, but how long is it in the impeachment of the acting president? Whether it's a majority or more than 200 people like the president, there's actually no regulation on this part either.
In the end, the Supreme Court or the Constitutional Court does not have a clear rule on what is happening, so this is bound to be controversial over and over again, so I think Acting President Han Deok-soo has repeatedly emphasized it, but expressed his opinion that he hopes to solve this problem through an agreement between the ruling and opposition parties.

[Anchor]
How did you hear it, lawyer? As Acting President Han Deok-soo has already vetoed six bills and the Democratic Party has vetoed them a while ago, why not appoint them? So what kind of authority should the acting president see as the main role, how do you see it?

[Son Jeonghye]
As you said, you are seeing the situation in which each legal interpretation is different depending on the interests of the political world. As such, I think there is a little more necessary aspect from the people's point of view. First of all, I would like to say this regarding acting authority. Today, while explaining about active exercise of authority and passive exercise of authority, the constitutional spirit is expected to exercise passive authority on the appointment of a constitutional judge. In the end, it is necessary to respect the opinions of the constitutional judges if this judgment is made, but in the end, there is a disagreement between the political circles of both parties.

In other words, I think we need to see how the Constitutional Court judges and many judges, who are the most final responsible and judgment authority for legal interpretation and constitutional order, are explaining it. The Constitutional Court has already repeatedly said that in this case, the president's authority is not exercised, and the acting prime minister can appoint a constitutional judge even in the process of the acting president exercising it. The three candidates for the Constitutional Court justice also spoke to the effect that they can be appointed regardless of the recommendation of the ruling and opposition parties. If so, the appointment process that is not contrary to the constitutional order is reasonable to act as an agent's duty and role.

In particular, if you look at the provisions of the law, I think I overlooked the fact that the president should not actively exercise his right to appoint but appoint what was appointed by the National Assembly, so I want to tell you that if the constitutional judge is left blank, the damage will inevitably be to the people. Regarding the veto power, this can also be interpreted as a battle based on the interests of the political community because the former confrontation between the ruling and opposition parties is still maintained now. Apart from this veto, how to proceed with the current impeachment trial is a very important issue, but it is also very worrisome and regrettable that it has not been organized as a political interest.

[Anchor]
The Democratic Party of Korea said it plans to report the impeachment bill at today's plenary session and vote on Han Deok-soo tomorrow. Once the agreement is submitted, acting Han Deok-soo said earlier that he will appoint it immediately. Also, at the time of Acting Hwang Kyo-ahn, he said that he appointed a constitutional judge after the constitutional decision, what about the past cases?

[Son Jeonghye]
So past and present cases are difficult to apply equally. At that time, various investigations related to bribery, abuse of authority, and obstruction of the exercise of rights were conducted for a very long time, rather than being investigated for foreign exchange, so if the president's authority and these things were not immediately suspended from office and were done after the impeachment, the investigation and arrest are inevitable in the case of civil war and foreign exchange crimes. As I said earlier, since it is related to the interpretation of the Constitution, I think it would be more appropriate to solve the case of former President Park Geun Hye in terms of how the interpretation of the basic constitution can exercise it rather than the logic of what happened.

[Anchor]
In the case of the power of the people, it is necessary to consider whether the acting president can appoint a constitutional judge. So, I'm planning to request a competent dispute trial on this part, but as the lawyer just said, most of the constitutional judges continued to express their opinions that the agency could appoint them. Despite hearing this from the power of the people, we are planning to request a trial for a dispute over authority, what meaning can we interpret this argument?

[KIM HYEONGJUN]
Is this the final issue? You're saying your opinion. I'm not saying that the Constitutional Court can appoint this through a formal meeting, for example, a judge's meeting, or something like that, but I'm just expressing my opinion. Then, even when the Constitutional Court, which we talked about in 2015, published a commentary on the Constitutional Court now, it was only his opinion. That's why it's hard to judge something is always right at this point. So what I'm telling you is that after all, it's hard to say which one is always right after there is no official opinion from the Supreme Court or constitutional institution, and even if the current case and the past case are different, the principle should be the same. What happened at that time was Acting Hwang Kyo-ahn, but why did the Democratic Party of Korea oppose the appointment of the head of the Constitutional Court at the time? If that's the case, I opposed the appointment of a constitutional judge at that time. I carried it through. I told him to do it after the impeachment process is over.

At that time, the recommendation is up to the Supreme Court's recommendation. It's not up to the president. Then, what I'm talking about now is not the responsibility of the lawmakers, the chief justice of the Supreme Court, or the president, so I didn't do it even though I could appoint it. At that time, the people who claimed that, including Rep. Choo Mi-ae, Rep. Woo Sang-ho and Rep. Park Beom-gye also claimed that. If so, what is the situation of the National Assembly even if this case is related to foreign exchange and civil war? You got him impeached.

Then, since the National Assembly will appoint a judge related to the impeachment, this is naturally the same as the prosecutor's appointment of a judge. So I'm not saying which one is right. Since it's a part where there can be objections together, if you pick one side and say that you have to go here because this is right, of course, there will be conflicts. Regardless of acting Han Deok-soo, if the ruling and opposition parties and the National Assembly speaker adjust this and solve this problem in their own way, they may be able to come up with solutions. What else can be pointed out by the Democratic Party of Korea? What was the reason for the impeachment of acting Han Deok-soo at first? You said if you don't appoint a judge, you're going to impeach him. You're impeaching the acting president for his work. But suddenly, it's gone, and since we're going to impeach what happened during the prime minister, isn't it a very political approach at first? The Minjoo Party needs to clarify the issue despite the fact that it took out the impeachment card to pressure the party, but now the entire issue is the prime minister. Kim Yong-hyun said he talked about martial law to Prime Minister Han Duck-soo. In the end, there are parts that have no choice but to go to political strife, so what you need to do to calm down and bring about state stability is to gather wisdom. Look at this now. Obviously, if more than 200 people are needed on the power side of the people, they will just say that they can act on behalf of them and make a competency dispute trial. Then we have to wait and see until the Constitutional Court comes to a conclusion in that situation. That's how I see it.

[Anchor]
The plenary session is now underway in the National Assembly. As the Democratic Party of Korea vowed earlier, there was a breaking news that the impeachment of acting President Han Deok-soo was reported at the plenary session of the National Assembly a while ago. Since the impeachment bill can be voted on a day after the plenary session's report, that is, after 24 hours, it was reported to the plenary session at 2:05 p.m., so it is currently expected that the vote will take place after 2:05 p.m. tomorrow. On the other hand, the Constitutional Court will hold the first hearing of the impeachment trial of President Yoon Suk Yeol tomorrow.

It is said that the preparation process has begun, such as holding a judge meeting this morning. Let's go to the scene.

[Lee Jin / Public information officer of the Constitutional Court]
I'm the press officer of the Constitutional Court. Let's start the briefing today. I will tell you about the proceedings of the judgment process. On December 24, the National Assembly's prosecution committee submitted a proof plan and a list of evidence to the Constitutional Court, including documents and witness applications, and additional power of attorney was also submitted. There is no document received from the respondent. At a meeting of the justices this morning, the justices reported the progress and countermeasures of the case, and the full bench shared awareness of the situation and countermeasures. That's about it.

[Anchor]
We listened to the Constitutional Court briefing together. First of all, the National Assembly's prosecution committee said yesterday that they submitted related documents and power of attorney. It was added that there was no document received from President Yoon. The Constitutional Court's position has been announced that the first hearing preparation date is scheduled for the 27th tomorrow, but the first hearing will be prepared as scheduled without the president's document. We will organize it as soon as we receive additional news about
. Then, if the Democratic Party seeks to impeach acting Han Deok-soo, the controversy continues over whether the quorum of votes is 151 or 200. Let's hear some comments about it and continue to hear them. Is the impeachment motion against Acting President Han Deok-soo 200 or 151 seats? Let me ask you your opinion first.

[Son Jeonghye]
I think the reasons and timing related to the impeachment prosecution will be important. If there is a violation of the Constitution or the law while exercising the president's authority as acting president, there is a reason for impeachment of the president's exercise of authority and the issue becomes a problem, so it would be reasonable to apply it similarly to the president's position in this case. However, apart from exercising the president's authority, it is correct to interpret it as 151 seats because it is reasonable to establish the standard at that time if the reason for impeachment is prosecuted for an act performed by the prime minister as an authority of the prime minister.

Therefore, it is expected to vary depending on the reason for the impeachment. If the prime minister is an important worker related to emergency martial law or various violations of the constitution or laws participating in the Cabinet meeting as prime minister are the main issues, the requirements for impeachment against the prime minister should be applied. Or, if the impeachment is carried out in connection with new reasons that have occurred after the acting authority, the majority opinion is that 200 seats are valid.

[Anchor]
The screen you're looking at is the scene of the plenary session of the National Assembly at this time. It's a scene where lawmakers are voting right now. Voting is currently taking place on the motion to appoint a candidate for the Constitutional Court. Now, the vote is underway after presenting the motion to appoint Ma Eun-hyuk, Jeong Gye-seon, and Cho Han-chang, the nominee for Constitutional Court justice, to the plenary session. The people's power has decided not to participate in the vote on the appointment motion at the general meeting of the lawmakers this morning. It seems that the opposition party is voting alone.

[Anchor]
The motion for the appointment of constitutional judges will be passed when a majority of the registered members attend or a majority of the members present agree. Even if the ruling party does not participate in today's vote, it is currently possible to vote on the appointment motion at the pan-opposition level, which occupies 192 seats.

[Anchor]
What do you think is the quorum for passing the impeachment motion against acting Han Deok-soo?

[KIM HYEONGJUN]
As the lawyer said just a moment ago, it seems that the dominant view is to classify them into two categories. If a problem arises in the process of serving as an acting president and impeaches him, it will be more than 200 seats by recognizing his status as president, but if he is impeached based on what happened during his time as prime minister, he will go to 151 seats like a regular member of the State Council.

Then I didn't say impeachment related to the prime minister from the beginning. The Democratic Party approached it very politically. For example, what did you say at first? Didn't you talk about three issues? Regarding the request for the recommendation of a permanent special prosecutor, the second crime of rebellion, and the Special Prosecutor Act of First Lady Kim Gun-hee. You said you'd impeach it if it didn't appoint a constitutional judge. Isn't that a requirement for impeachment in the presence of an acting president? Then, of course, it's 200 seats. But I don't think that's going to work, so I'm going to take something related to the civil war that happened when I was prime minister. I think it shows how expedient it is. Also, I was surprised to see what a lawmaker of the Democratic Party of Korea said. Is this a matter for the chairman to judge?

How the Speaker's judgment can determine whether it is 151 or 200 seats... I think this is wrong. He keeps talking about precedents. The speaker presides over the meeting and is not the subject to judge this part of the Constitution and does not have that authority. If so, if we continue to take this issue, of course, the power of the people will make a competitive judgment. So if there is a legal debate on this issue, time will inevitably be delayed. So it's right because we've never experienced this before, and how to show the process of solving it properly, regardless of whether it's right or wrong, is the basis for creating a more mature democracy.

[Anchor]
So, it seems necessary to interpret the Constitutional Court's authority on this part. If the interpretation comes out and the prime minister is impeached, so the Democratic Party of Korea shows its willingness to go to the next acting deputy prime minister, Choi Sang-mok. Do you think Choi Sang-mok, the deputy prime minister for economy, is better for the Democratic Party?

[KIM HYEONGJUN]
That's the problem. Impeach the acting president for example because who is better. Let's say I became the acting chief executive. If he continues, then if he doesn't appoint him, will he eventually impeach him with what he participated in at the Cabinet meeting during martial law? The biggest problem is that we are too focused on domestic issues, but Korea's external credibility is on the decline and the economy is set to become very difficult on a strict basis. With the issue of Lee's impeachment, and furthermore, the U.S. government has declared its support for Han Deok-soo's system. Will Acting President Choi Sang-mok continue to do the same as Acting President Han Deok-soo, impeach him, and then Deputy Prime Minister for Education Lee Ju-ho?

As this can only be seen as an intention to solve the problem in its own way in a biased and partisan way, I think such a strategy is by no means desirable if the DP wants to go to an authoritative party in the future, so didn't the National Assembly speaker and the ruling and opposition party leaders say that Han Deok-soo will be appointed immediately when the acting president gathers to come up with a political solution on this issue? I think it's necessary for us to consider not only our problems but also the tremendous crisis surrounding us.

[Anchor]
Park Chan-dae, the floor leader of the National Assembly, is the beginning of the normalization of the Republic of Korea by appointing a constitutional judge as soon as possible and forming a full nine-member body. I made the argument like this. If we continue like this with the six-member system and the nine-member system, how will it affect the impeachment trial of President Yoon?

[Son Jeonghye]
In short, the interpretation of the Constitution is somewhat dominated by majority opinions, and the reason why politicians make different arguments is to open the possibility that they can dismiss even one person under the six-member system if they vote against Yoon Suk Yeol's impeachment in the hope that the impeachment trial will be dismissed. In the end, this claims political interests regardless of the interpretation and order of the Constitution.

So, if you oppose three candidates for the Constitutional Court because they have flaws or qualifications, you can accept it from a general legal point of view, but I think that simply expressing this many different opinions about individual candidates without arguing that they should not be constitutional judges is only an arbitrary and one-sided interpretation from those who do not want an impeachment trial. I think the Constitutional Court should order as soon as possible.

[Anchor]
Earlier, I showed you the briefing screen of the Constitutional Court, and in addition to the contents, the Constitutional Court reportedly answered that the acting justice of the National Assembly can be appointed. And there is no official position on the quorum of impeachment against Acting President Han Deok-soo. I also expressed this opinion. The preparation date for the first hearing of President Yoon's impeachment trial is scheduled for tomorrow, but the Constitutional Court said it would prepare for the first hearing as scheduled.


[Kim Hyungjun]
Judges' meetings are usually limited to administrative affairs. The judges' meeting is in Article 6. More than two-thirds of the lawmakers must attend and more than half of the lawmakers present are voted on, and the decision on which issue is considered important, and if the head of the Constitutional Court submits it to the judges' meeting, there may be a decision on this matter. So, even now, even if the president seems to be delaying this without submitting an answer, I think that the decision to start the trial process on the 27th and tomorrow was decided during the judges' meeting.

And if the president doesn't answer, isn't there some answers from the National Assembly? I'm saying that I'll start a trial based on that, so isn't it a situation where the president can't continue to drag on this issue in the future? So I don't know why the president doesn't announce a clear position on this part. You have to say, "How long will you do it? Strictly speaking, if you give me time to form a defense team, I will give you enough answers to the Constitutional Court's requests regarding this matter." It's not just Seok Dong-hyun's lawyer, is it? This is trying to delay the trial as people keep talking about it in a situation where they are only providing legal advice. And furthermore, the president promised the people. If you say you won't avoid political and legal responsibility, and if you say you'll stand up and fight impeachment or prosecution, the implication of the phrase "confidently" means that you won't avoid it according to the procedure. I think it's a much more confident appearance to show such an appearance that can fit in its own way.

[Anchor]
As you said, the Constitutional Court's impeachment trial takes precedence over President Yoon's investigation, but it has not appointed a delegation of representatives and submitted documents. In this regard, Constitutional Judge Kim Hyung-doo met with reporters on his way to work and expressed his position. Let's listen to
.

[Anchor]
If you listen now, it is possible to replace the evidence with the one submitted by the National Assembly. There was a comment like this, what is this about?

[Son Jeonghye]
It's a matter of course. In the process of arranging issues and planning evidence, the Constitutional Court may order both sides to submit evidence, but it has the authority to collect submissions ex officio, so if one party does not submit it, evidence can be submitted through the other party and used as psychological data. In the case of data not submitted by both parties or confidential information of investigative agencies, the Constitutional Court can send an order to adopt and submit it ex officio, so it is a process of collecting evidence for the hearing necessary now, and even if the subject of the collection is not the respondent, there is no special effect on the evidence, so it can be seen as part of the collection process.

[Anchor]
Just a moment ago, the professor said that the president was too unseemly and that the defense team would need to formalize the situation, but according to some media, President Yoon is preparing a plan to send a message to the people before the end of this year. Since today is the 26th, there are only five days left. There is a saying that it is as early as today, but if this happens, it has been reported indirectly through lawyer Seok Dong-hyun, so what do you think is the reason for you to come forward in person?

[KIM HYEONGJUN]
Former President Park Geun Hye did the same. I think he can express his opinion because he is suspended from his job. What's important is not to present a discourse, but how much the content can really empathize and persuade the people. I think I'm going to turn it off slowly. If you look at it earlier, the Constitutional Court said there was no official position on the quorum of the impeachment motion. However, as the Constitutional Court's position has been decided, some say that in order to solve this part accurately, the Constitutional Court and the Supreme Court should make their own decisions quickly. Otherwise, if it continues to be delayed, on the other side of the people's power, two constitutional judges will expire their terms on April 18.

So shouldn't we finish everything before the term expires? So there are some people who argue that they are just speeding up, and they are looking at the impeachment trial in a very mixed part of these parts. The most important thing is that no matter how fast you go, if you don't follow the rules, constitution, and legal regulations, there may be various controversies, so I think you should watch this calmly.

[Anchor]
There were also media reports that President Yoon would make a position through SNS, saying that procedures should be prioritized over speed. Let's listen to the related recording. Ahn Cheol Soo People's Power Rep. Yoon said, "As President Yoon is a suspect, it does not seem appropriate to express his position in person. What kind of argument did you make, and how did you hear it?"

[Son Jeonghye]
Because I've already spoken to the public twice. I had a press briefing through lawyer Seok Dong-hyun. And today, opinions and arguments were expressed several times through former Minister Kim's lawyer about why he declared such martial law. There are two big ones. There was majority tyranny over the Democratic Party. Second, there are two arguments that the suspicion of fraudulent elections has not been resolved. Even if this is repeated again, it will not be new information, and no matter what self-excuses and rationalizations the president makes, it is difficult to persuade the people if the same thing is repeated unless it is a specific and clear apology or an expression of responsibility at a time when the people already think that this has harmed the constitutional order.

With just one objection, the tyranny of the Democratic Party's majority must be solved as a political problem, and the constitution does not require that the political problem be solved by martial law, which is used in extreme situations and wartime conditions. As such, it is confirmed that martial law is illegal. The same goes for rigged elections. At a time when there is no urgent need for urgent action against rigged elections due to the impending election, they tried to investigate rigged elections or arrest those involved by force? It's not common sense. It should be possible to provide a basis for such fraudulent elections, but given the various statements and briefings so far, it seems that some far-right conservative YouTubers have no choice but to talk about their claims. The controversy related to the fraudulent election was already pending in 100 to 200 cases to the court after the general and presidential elections. All claims have been dismissed and dismissed.

What argument can justify the attempt to deploy and utilize 1,500 military troops in a situation where specific possibilities or contents of fraudulent elections cannot be explained? That's why even within the ruling party, there are opinions that it is necessary for the president to refrain from making direct remarks.

[Anchor]
After the martial law incident, whenever the president made a few statements, negative reactions were common. Let me ask you some questions like the one given to Representative Ahn Cheol Soo in the recording. Professor, are you worried about the president's announcement of his position in person? Are you looking forward to
?

[KIM HYEONGJUN]
Before announcing it, if you cooperate with the Constitutional Court's remarks faithfully and then do it, you can do it to some extent, but I think there are enough parts that can be suspected of what the intention was. Do your research to the people now. When you ask whether this martial law was good or bad, it is overwhelmingly said that martial law was wrong. There is consensus across the nation that this martial law is unconstitutional and illegal. But is it a crime of rebellion or a crime of rebellion? That is an issue that will be revealed through an investigation, for example in the future. What I wanted to say is that clearly the wrong emergency martial law cannot justify the majority of tyranny that the Democratic Party has shown in the National Assembly.

I agree that we should be able to prevent it in other ways regarding the majority tyranny, but we should point out that the Democratic Party of Korea has done wrong in relation to the majority tyranny that has been shown so far, if not on the same line to some extent. In my view, this is probably what the president wants to say over time. The National Assembly has so overwhelmingly paralyzed justice and administration that there is no other way. So it was done in terms of governance, called emergency martial law, but that's wrong. So even if you presuppose something wrong, isn't there a lot of things we're talking about now?
Now, we impeach the prosecutor who investigates representative Lee Jae-myung not only for this part but also for the part that violates the Constitution.

Can't that be seen as obstruction of justice? This is unconstitutional. Can all of this be justified in the meantime? As time goes by, I think the Democratic Party-related parts should also be reevaluated.

[Anchor]
At this time, we are sending you the situation of the plenary session of the National Assembly in real time. Let's hear from him.

[Won-Sik Woo / Speaker of the National Assembly]
Next, I'll open the ballot box.

[Anchor]
I just opened the plaque. It looks like we're going to open the ballot box now. So, the process of opening the plaque and checking whether one vote per person was exercised was carried out. Now, it is expected that the process of determining whether or not to open the ballot box will continue.

[Anchor]
A vote on the appointment of three constitutional judges recommended by the National Assembly has just been made. It seems that it will take some time to check after opening the ballot box. In the meantime, we will continue to talk about President Yoon, but lawyer Son Jeong-hye criticized what former Minister Kim Yong-hyun's lawyer revealed this morning.
If you look at the contents, there are three reasons for the declaration of emergency martial law. It was intended to raise the alarm at the parliamentary defeat. It was intended to resolve suspicions about the Korean election. It was intended to organize anti-state forces and hand down a free Korea. There was a story like this. How did you hear it?

[KIM HYEONGJUN]
Isn't this what President Yoon Suk Yeol has been talking about? It's martial law that raised the alarm, but it hasn't been confirmed yet, but haven't there been other things coming out, such as ordering the arrest of lawmakers? But why did you send military troops into the National Assembly to prevent all lawmakers from entering the Assembly? That's not a bluff, strictly speaking. And are there any areas that can only resolve suspicions related to fraudulent elections through martial law?

[Anchor]
Just a moment ago, there was a saying that the National Assembly speaker had 194 people participating in the vote. So there are 192 seats in the pan-night area. Some of the ruling party seems to have participated. Chairman Woo Won-sik is said to have corrected the number to 195, not 194.

[Anchor]
If this happens, there are 192 pan-nights, which means that two to three people from the ruling party participated in the vote. Because the ruling party said it would not participate in the vote at all, how should I look at this number of votes?

[KIM HYEONGJUN]
No matter how party it is, some lawmakers will participate and vote for it clearly in the last impeachment. Furthermore, some lawmakers may think that this should be passed because it is up to the National Assembly related to the Constitutional Court. However, when it comes out like this, it's useless to argue about whether you're close to each other or you're close to each other. That's why it's going to be passed because such an overwhelming number of people participated. The question is what kind of vote will come out when the re-decision is made and returned to the National Assembly. Didn't it go up to 198 seats last time related to the Special Prosecutor's Act on Kim Gun-hee?

So, we can proceed little by little in this situation, but if we impeach the acting president unconditionally and take it like this, we cannot solve the problem that needs to be solved by politics, but we have no choice but to continue to go to the conflict structure. In the end, it's a matter of leadership and the leaders of the ruling and opposition parties should have the will to solve this problem anyway, but I think it shows very clearly that Korean politics is collapsing in a word.

[Anchor]
And I was talking about former Minister Kim Yong-hyun earlier, but I will not allow some media outlets to cover the news at a press conference of former Minister Kim Yong-hyun's lawyers today. While sticking to this policy, there was also a conflict. I heard that the police were even dispatched. Let's ask the lawyer about this.

[Son Jeonghye]
It seems that they lack respect for the people and have shown their views on the media. Military troops are breaking into the National Assembly right now, so we're only talking about it because it's so serious, but one of the most important issues in the decree is that it has written a decree limiting the freedom of press association.

In any case, is it allowed for us to handle the right to cover the media and broadcast the media so easily, even though freedom of press assembly and freedom of press expression cannot be restricted? I have to tell you a very negative view in that it can never be allowed. Again, do you exclude certain media companies in conveying their position regarding this martial law situation before the people? This is a kind of oppression of the media, and it flows similar to the view of the military government in the past that it gags at media that disagree with me or strongly criticize me. Although it may be a media company that is somewhat critical of me and somewhat uncomfortable to me, if there are people who respect the media company, I can tell you that it is political power to endure and persuade him. I'd like to tell you that rejecting me as negative is not a permissible country.

[Anchor]
At the press conference of former Minister Kim Yong-hyun's lawyers today, I was curious about whether former intelligence commander Roh Sang-won would talk about it. It has nothing to do with the president and served as an adviser to the minister. So it feels like he's trying to carry everything from the spectacular line. How did you like it?

[KIM HYEONGJUN]
I would have made a strategic decision. If it is directly related to the president, there are many such criticisms in many ways. It would be disastrous if former intelligence commander Roh Sang-won, who is talking about now, received direct instructions with the president and related instructions at a time when there are criticisms about whether this is a shamanic and shamanic regime. As a result, former Defense Minister Kim Yong-hyun will take everything on his own. And the relationship with Roh Sang-won is reduced to the relationship between himself and former Minister Kim Yong-hyun. This is something we can't talk about here. I think there is no choice but to make a judgment on this issue through objective evidence and legal principles through the investigation.

[Anchor]
This is what came out as well. So, the lawyers said that former Minister Kim Yong-hyun made it clear. Regarding the martial law proposal, the procedure was first reported to Prime Minister Han Deok-soo in advance and suggested it to the President. Isn't this unfavorable to acting Han Deok-soo?

[Son Jeonghye]
Rather than talking about unfavorable content to acting Han Deok-soo, it seems to be a process of pleading to emphasize the legality of the deliberation of the State Council. According to some reports, in particular, Han was not as substantial as the State Council, and most of the State Council members did not know that there were discussions on martial law, and some were not heard properly and did not express their opinions, and a number of State Council members were summoned to investigative agencies as suspects or as reference witnesses. The conclusion of a common investigative agency is interpreted as having no substance as a cabinet meeting.

[Anchor]
I'll connect you to the conference room while you're talking.

[Won-Sik Woo / Speaker of the National Assembly]
I'll tell you the results of the vote later.

[Anchor]
Please keep talking, lawyer.

[Son Jeonghye]
As a counterargument to the conclusion that there was no substance of the State Council, it is a process to argue the legality of proposing and reporting to the Prime Minister, presenting the agenda, and practically having a Cabinet meeting. Because at first, the first sentence came out that martial law declaration was legal. However, the counterargument to that seems to be an excuse that the cabinet meeting was actually held and there was a practical meeting because we suggested and reported to the prime minister in case he said, "What is the counterargument to that?"

[Anchor]
There was also a story about the decree. The draft was mainly written by former Minister Kim Yong-hyun, which included a curfew for the people, which President Yoon ordered to delete. Based on the fact that he only pointed out this part, is it to ease the responsibility for the president's proclamation? How did you like it?

[Kim Hyungjun] It's not
. I heard that one thing is missing. What's the content of Pogoryeong No. 1? There's talk about the National Assembly. No matter how emergency martial law is, for example, paralyzing the function of the National Assembly or preventing the power of the National Assembly gave the National Assembly the power to resolve the martial law when it became martial law, although it did not exist in the past, right? But I pointed out those things. I don't know anything else, but I need to take out the National Assembly's stuff like this to make martial law that we've talked about so far. With military troops, including helicopters, entering the National Assembly and being blocked from entering, it is truly martial law. So, the reason why martial law took place in the overall context surrounding emergency martial law rather than the issue of any one is that it has been driven by three parts: to fundamentally block the function of the National Assembly, to resolve suspicions related to fraudulent elections, and then to punish anti-state forces. This is the more important part. How did we do the curfew we talk about? It's very incidental. It's a side branch.

[Anchor]
However, since former Minister Kim Yong-hyun was arrested on the 12th, he is known to have not made statements related to martial law in the prosecution's summons investigation, but he held a press conference through his lawyer today. If so, some analysts say that this message might be directed to President Yoon.

[Son Jung-hye]
{Kim ∀}It could be a message to President Yoon, and since former Minister Kim Yong-hyun is under arrest investigation and the arrest period is nearing its completion, he seems to have held a press briefing to claim his injustice and legitimacy through his lawyer as a political voice. In other words, briefing the media seems to be a procedure to speak out to supporters, political decision-makers, and explain various reasons for protecting the president at a time when they are legally bound and more likely to be guilty than innocent. One objection is that the procedure was not legal as I said earlier. Then, most of the members of the State Council must recognize and agree on the necessity and legitimacy of such emergency rules in the Korean Constitution to increase their legitimacy. There are no members of the State Council who claim that it was a very national emergency and an emergency situation to the extent that an emergency rule was issued.

Then, since this is a situation that clearly shows that it was an arbitrary decision by former Minister Kim Yong-hyun and President Yoon, no matter how fraudulent the election was at the time and the Democratic Party of Korea was so tyrannical, it seems that they cannot answer the question of why they forced the emergency martial law that even the State Council members could not persuade.

[Anchor]
At this time, the National Assembly's plenary session is voting on the appointment of three constitutional judges. I told you earlier that 195 plaques have been confirmed. As a result, the ruling party's departure vote was estimated to be three. However, in the power of the people, lawmakers Cho Kyung-tae, Kim Sang-wook, and Han Ji-ah reportedly participated in the vote on the appointment today.

[Anchor]
They are believed to have voted in favor of the Dec. 14 vote on the impeachment of the president. Among them, lawmaker Cho Kyung-tae is said to have expressed his position that he participated in the vote with the will of the people in hopes that the impeachment phase will be sorted out. I just heard that there are an estimated three people who voted to leave the ruling party. The investigation is continuing, but yesterday, he refused to comply with President Yoon's official request for a second summons. There are also rumors that the possibility of forced investigation is growing. I think the position of the Senior Civil Servant Corruption Investigations Unit is also changing little by little. Why is that?

[KIM HYEONGJUN]
The main part seems to be whether the Senior Civil Servant Corruption Investigations Unit has the powerful power to handle it. So if you say you will issue an arrest warrant and implement it, will you be able to issue a warrant? To do that, very meticulous...

[Anchor]
The conclusion hasn't come out yet. Let's continue to listen to the professor.

[KIM HYEONGJUN]
That's why I think we'll continue until the third summons. The problem is that lawyer Seok Dong-hyun also said that impeachment should be prioritized over investigation, so there is no way to prevent it in that case. Furthermore, if this is transferred to the special prosecutor's office, the Senior Civil Servant Corruption Investigations Unit will have to hand over all investigation records to the special prosecutor's office, right? But in a way, it was December 3rd that he was impeached. So how much objective evidence is collected during that period and what is very decisive to prove that it is a crime of rebellion. I don't think there's that much conviction about whether these things are acceptable when you apply to the court. As a result, the parts where there is only a workshop are repeated. In that regard, I think it is necessary to clarify what position the president has on his own.

[Anchor]
For now, I don't think the president will respond even if the Senior Civil Servant Corruption Investigations Unit gives the president a third summons, what do you think?

[Son Jeonghye]
It has already been said that the Constitutional Court will judge first and the investigation will be conducted later. Yesterday, despite an unusual situation in which investigative agencies waited for hours for the suspect, they did not schedule the investigation by appointing a lawyer. Since there is room for indirect interpretation as a willingness not to attend within this year, I think there will be only a judgment from the collaborative version on whether to postpone this to January and give it until the deadline. If you haven't already responded to the summons twice and haven't tried to coordinate the summons schedule, you're in a clear position that you won't respond to the summons investigation. Then the only option for the joint investigation is to seek an arrest warrant. Will you wait indefinitely? Or are you going to persuade them to come out on their own? As a means of persuading, I think they will prepare to get an arrest warrant.

An arrest warrant is very likely to be issued. The arrest warrant remains to be seen, but most of the suspects have repeatedly judged that the seriousness and vocation of the crime are recognized to some extent in the actual process of the arrest warrant, and since former Minister Kim Yong-hyun's participation and discussion have been made several times, the seriousness and vocation of the crime have been made to some extent, and the possibility of destroying evidence and the fear of running away is only to be judged.

[Anchor]
As the lawyer said, there is a very high possibility that an arrest warrant will be issued, but I don't think the public will want it to become a reality. Because such a scene is still a sitting president.

[KIM HYEONGJUN]
Because I'm in the position of the president while I'm suspended from office.

[Anchor]
I don't think you'd want to see me being forced into a job.

[KIM HYEONGJUN]
That's right. The part about how beneficial it would be to make an arrest through an investigation when impeachment is in progress anyway and the impeachment bill has been passed. And there is no possibility of running away, and because of the seriousness of the situation, he has now been impeached. If so, even if you issue an arrest warrant and go to arrest, it's only like you're going to see your office in prison. Shall we go to that part? I think we should consider that, too.
[Anchor]
At the plenary session of the National Assembly, a vote was held on the appointment of three constitutional judges recommended by the National Assembly. The results are expected to come out soon, but for now, the opposition party can vote alone without the ruling party. However, acting Han Deok-soo expressed his position that he would not appoint without an agreement between the ruling and opposition parties. The Democratic Party will impeach such a thing. That's why he proposed impeachment. The quorum of impeachment decisions has not been settled yet. If the so-called vote is expected to take place tomorrow, 151 votes or 200 votes. Who decides this?

[Son Jeonghye]
First of all, if only the contents related to martial law during the time of Prime Minister as a requirement for impeachment are specified.

[Anchor]
Wait a minute. Let's hear the speaker's announcement.

[Won-Sik Woo / Speaker of the National Assembly]
Let me tell you the results of the vote. First of all, the Constitutional Court Judge Ma Eun-hyuk declares that out of the total 195 votes, 193 votes, one abstention, and one invalid vote were passed. The following Constitutional Court trials and political election proposals declare that out of the 195 total votes, 193 votes, one wealth, and one abstention were passed. The next Constitutional Court Judge Cho Han-chang declares that out of the total 195 votes, 185 votes, six votes, one abstention, and three invalid votes were passed. I'd like to say something before the next agenda. Today, the National Assembly elected judges of the Constitutional Court, Ma Eun-hyuk, Jeong Gye-seon, and Cho Han-chang. This is the result of Article 11 of the Constitution, Article 6 of the Constitutional Court Act, which states that three of the judges of the Constitutional Court appoint persons elected by the National Assembly.

As the National Assembly's process for the appointment of constitutional judges has been completed, the acting president should complete the appointment process without delay. It's not a matter of controversy. Our Constitution and law stipulate that the appointment process of three of the nine constitutional judges elected to the National Assembly should be elected and appointed to the plenary session after a confirmation hearing by the National Assembly. The Constitutional Society's consensus interpretation is that the exercise of the acting authority is natural because the president's appointment is a formal and procedural process, not the creation of a new constitutional order. The Constitutional Court and the Supreme Court have stated the same position. In particular, the three constitutional judges were recommended by the agreement of the ruling and opposition parties. It is difficult to excuse the ruling and opposition parties' agreement over procedural appointments. It's not even right.

Even though the act of appointment is not the subject of discussion between the ruling and opposition parties in the first place, asking them to agree on it means that they will not actually do it and violates the National Assembly's right to elect constitutional judges. Tomorrow is the first day to prepare for the president's impeachment trial. It is warm and urgent to restore the normal system of nine constitutional judges. Only when the normal operation of the constitutional institution is the way to resolve uncertainty in the country and the nine-member system is completed will any decision, whether or not, be able to minimize political and social confusion after the impeachment trial. Delays or rejections of appointments to constitutional judges elected by the National Assembly are without justification. The acting president should fulfill his responsibilities in accordance with the Constitution, laws, and common sense of the people. There should be no other confusion in state affairs over the implementation of the procedures set by the law. The criterion for judging the value of everyone who eats rust of the people is the Republic of Korea and the people. There can be no exceptions. I reiterate that there should be a decision in the direction of reducing instability from the perspective of the people of the Republic of Korea. Schedule (4) From the amendment to the Framework Act on Education, Schedule 9.

[Anchor]
You've heard what National Assembly Speaker Woo Won-sik said. First of all, the motion for the appointment of three candidates for the Constitutional Court, Ma Eun-hyuk, Jeong Gye-seon, and Cho Han-chang, was passed at the plenary session a little while ago. In the process, the ruling party was expected to boycott the vote today, but most of them were absent, and it is estimated that about three people left the ruling party. It is now understood that lawmakers Cho Kyung-tae, Kim Sang-wook, and Han Ji-ah participated in the vote on the appointment motion today. And National Assembly Speaker Woo Won-sik said this when he announced the results of the vote. The three constitutional judges were proposed by agreement between the ruling and opposition parties, saying that the acting president should appoint them without delay. The act of appointment is not originally the subject of an agreement between the ruling and opposition parties. There was a comment like this. And there was an urgent need to restore the normal system of nine constitutional judges. And there was also a comment saying that it violates the National Assembly's right to elect constitutional judges. Professor, I'll wrap this up after talking about this, but how did you hear this part?

[KIM HYEONGJUN]
National Assembly Speaker Woo Won-sik keeps talking. Since the National Assembly went through the hearing and the ruling and opposition parties agreed to it, the acting president would have asked for the appointment without delay. Didn't the Prime Minister say the exact opposite today? by agreement between the ruling and opposition parties Let me say something. Why did the nine-member system of the Constitutional Court, which is so important, become a six-member system? The Democratic Party, which has not been appointed so far, now has to go to a nine-member system and the nine-member system is normal. Then the speaker didn't tell you to appoint this quickly, did he? I'm not saying that I'm siding with one side on these things, but please don't follow it if there's a set order, but interpret it only in your favor when a situation occurs and talk as if it's the right answer. In the end, I think there are only three ways to solve it: the Constitutional Court or the Supreme Court's ruling, and furthermore, the ruling and opposition parties through consensus.

[Anchor]
Earlier, I connected while listening to lawyer Sohn's answer to this question, and Han Deok-soo, acting president, agreed between the ruling and opposition parties first. He said he'd put the appointment on hold. In response, the Democratic Party of Korea will report the impeachment of acting Han Deok-soo at the plenary session today, isn't it? I asked this question about who will decide the quorum if the vote is held tomorrow.

[Son Jeonghye]
This is how it looks like it will proceed. In the National Assembly, the National Assembly is expected to deliver the impeachment resolution and the prosecution to the Constitutional Court if the National Assembly speaker votes 151 seats. Then the Constitutional Court will be served with this impeachment and internally review the legality of the service. If 151 seats are correct, the case number related to the impeachment trial will be given and the quorum is insufficient, there is a possibility that they will reject it if it results in a judgment that why it is not 200 seats. In the end, all issues are currently decided by the Constitutional Court, so the conclusion is expected to be made depending on whether or not the Constitutional Court receives an impeachment motion.

[Anchor]
First of all, he said that we have to wait and see how the Constitutional Court will conclude. So far, we have been with Kim Hyung-joon, chair professor of Baejae University, and lawyer Son Jung-hye. Thank you both.