Director of the Airborne Division "Exercise according to the principle of arrest warrant...Enforcement within the deadline"

■ Host: Anchor Yoon Bori, anchor Na Kyung-chul
■ Starring: Lawyer Sohn Soo-ho

* 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 head of the Senior Civil Servant Corruption Investigations Unit came to work even though it was a holiday today. At the same time, he said that if it interferes with the execution of the warrant, the crime of obstructing the execution of special public affairs can be applied. What's your position, lawyer? How did you see it?

[Sonho]
Since the warrant was legally requested and issued, he emphasized that executing the warrant is also a legitimate execution of public affairs. Therefore, he said that if the execution of a warrant corresponding to the legitimate execution of public affairs is prevented, it is a crime. There seem to be various concerns about the position of the Senior Civil Servant Corruption Investigations Unit.

Because we don't know for sure until now what position the security agency will take. And if a crowd gathers in front of the official residence and reacts strongly, I think there will be a lot of practical confusion. Therefore, it seems that he made the remarks as a warning and also as a way to induce smooth execution.

However, if you do not lock or open the door or cooperate in this case, you cannot see it as a crime. This is because assault or intimidation is the only crime of obstructing the execution of public affairs. In addition, the assault referred to in the crime of obstructing the execution of public affairs is an assault in a broad sense. In other words, it is one level lower than the assault in the crime of rebellion, but it is a little narrow, but it is quite broad.

However, during Ssangyong Motor's strike in 2009, he was sentenced to three years in prison in the first and second trials for obstructing the execution of public affairs, but the Supreme Court reversed it and returned it for innocence, and there are cases where he was found not guilty. In anticipation of the arrival of suppression forces, various items were installed in advance, or various obstacles were sprayed in advance.

However, in this case, the Supreme Court did not consider it an assault for obstructing the execution of public affairs. Therefore, not all actions that interfere with the execution of arrest warrants will be a crime of obstruction of justice. However, today's position of the Senior Civil Servant Corruption Investigations Unit is interpreted as expressing this position in anticipation of a smooth execution of such a warrant without conflict.

[Anchor]
Nevertheless, if the security agency defends, it can come up with a security law. If the Senior Civil Servant Corruption Investigations Unit conflicts with the special crimes of obstruction of justice, which one can be considered higher?

[Sonho]
The Security Service places great importance on the Presidential Security Act, and it would not be strange to act in accordance with the regulations in the first place. However, considering the system, status, and grounds for warrant execution, no matter how much the presidential security service has to protect, the execution of the warrant, which is a legitimate official execution, should take precedence. And considering the hierarchy of various laws, even if we claim that in this situation, we are a security agency, so we protect according to the security law, it does not seem very likely that this will be recognized as a legitimate legitimate act and execution of work.

I don't think the security service officials know this part. Therefore, it seems that both sides are currently thinking a lot about how to act according to legal interpretation as well as legal interpretation.

[Anchor]
So, President Yoon's side is basically claiming that the Senior Civil Servant Corruption Investigations Unit does not have the right to investigate the rebellion itself. So, they are very denying the issuance of warrants. Today, Senior Superintendent of Public Offenses Oh Dong-woon said that the court issued a warrant, putting an end to the controversy over the investigative power. Should it be considered that the issuance of this warrant by the court recognized this right to investigate?

[Sonho]
It is hard to say that it is the final and final judgment of the judiciary. However, at least at this stage, the investigative power of the Senior Civil Servant Corruption Investigations Unit has not been denied, so it can be seen that the various procedures carried out by the Senior Civil Servant Corruption Investigations Unit will be more powerful in the future. You can think of it at that level, and if the court ruled that the Senior Civil Servant Corruption Investigations Unit did not have the right to investigate, an arrest warrant could not have been issued.

But a warrant was issued. However, President Yoon is arguing for the validity of issuing this warrant. In particular, they declared it illegal and invalid, but there is no right means to argue. In other words, as lawyer Yoon Gap-geun himself said, there is no warrant appeal system. So it's not easy to argue about the warrant being issued.

As a result, the president's side is dragging it to the Constitutional Court as a detour or as a desperate measure. But is a competency dispute trial really a legitimate means? I don't see it like that. Considering the requirements of the competency dispute trial, one of the constitutional trials, it seems highly likely that it will be dismissed because it does not meet the requirements.

And there is a past case of applying for an injunction to suspend the validity of the warrant. In other words, when members of the United Progressive Party were investigated, search warrants were issued, and there was an injunction to argue about them.Of course, Ma has never been recognized by the Constitutional Court.

Also, at the time of Baek Nam-ki's death, he filed a request for a trial to confirm that various actions such as water spray and search warrants were issued, which were unconstitutional.Ma has become His Excellency. In addition to that, I applied for an injunction to suspend the effect.Ma was once rejected as well.

In view of this, I think that even if President Yoon makes various appeals to the Constitutional Court, there is a higher possibility that he will not be judged because he meets all the actual requirements.

[Anchor]
The court eventually issued an arrest warrant, but it didn't issue it until 33 hours after the request. It took a lot longer than usual. What did you consider important and what was the issue?

[Sonho]
Of course, which part did you look at carefully? I guess so.Can the Senior Civil Servant Corruption Investigations Unit investigate this part or the president's rebellion? I think I would have thought more about this part. Or even if it didn't take as much time to worry about it, it's possible that the importance of this issue and the various consequences of this result were so great that they were more cautious. However, positive and negative opinions regarding whether the Senior Civil Servant Corruption Investigations Unit can investigate the president's alleged rebellion are very different in view of the situation. First of all, from the standpoint that the Senior Civil Servant Corruption Investigations Unit cannot investigate allegations of presidential rebellion, it argues that it can open an investigation into abuse of authority, but there are no regulations to investigate presidential rebellion.

However, if you look closely at the contents, you can open an investigation into abuse of authority. And you can also investigate related crimes that you perceived while investigating. Therefore, looking at the literature alone, the Senior Civil Servant Corruption Investigations Unit can also investigate the president's alleged rebellion. However, even if it can be done in the literature, is such an interpretation valid? Is it right to interpret it like that? There can be various differences as to whether such a result is correct.

However, opponents and deniers are arguing that it is not possible under the regulations. In addition, the affirmative side believes that this is always possible because it is. So I think they probably thought a little bit about which of these two arguments is right.

[Anchor]
One of the issues that President Yoon's lawyer Yoon Gap-geun took issue with yesterday was the Western District Court where an arrest warrant was issued. That's why the Senior Civil Servant Corruption Investigations Unit requested an arrest warrant to the Western District Court. Why the hell did you do it to the Western District Court? Originally, I raised this question, "Shouldn't it be done to the Central District Court?" How do you see this part?

[Sonho]
In this regard, various conspiracy theories have been raised, and various interpretations from the political community are being rampant. First of all, the position of the Senior Civil Servant Corruption Investigations Unit is Hannam-dong, Yongsan-gu. However, the court in charge of Yongsan-gu is the Western District Court. He said there is no problem with that part because he has jurisdiction over Yongsan-gu, Mapo-gu, Seodaemun-gu, and Eunpyeong-gu.

Then, this is not the case for President Yoon. According to the Corruption Investigations Unit Act, when the prosecutor of the Corruption Investigations Unit filed a prosecution, he argued that the Seoul Central District Court should file a claim here because it is in charge of the first trial. On the other hand, I refuted it again. Even so, the Senior Civil Servant Corruption Investigations Unit retorted that it could be done to other courts considering the crime, the location of the evidence, and other special circumstances.

And in addition to this, even Article 31 of the Corruption Investigations Unit Act applies only when the prosecutor of the Corruption Investigations Unit files a prosecution. Therefore, in the case of this case, even though the Senior Civil Servant Corruption Investigations Unit can investigate, about the president's civil war. After the investigation, the case should be sent back to the prosecution, and the prosecution should prosecute it. That's why they say there's no problem. On this, President Yoon will refute again.

In that case, the Senior Civil Servant Corruption Investigations Unit should send the case to the Central District Prosecutors' Office the last time it sends it. If so, we're exchanging arguments with each other about whether it's right to request a warrant from the Central District Court, and we've tried to create an airborne office and overhaul various regulations.There is confusion. And there are a lot of procedures that I've never done before.

As a result, it seems that the two sides are engaged in such a battle, but in principle, the investigative agency can determine which court to request the warrant from and this can be determined by considering various circumstances. So, even if there is any special consideration, it does not seem easy to argue over the validity of the warrant as long as the court has received a warrant request and issued the warrant.

However, there is also an arrest system. It's not a fight over an arrest warrant, it's a fight after you've been arrested, but you could argue that it's wrong for me to be arrested because it's the wrong warrant to be issued in the first place.Ma doesn't seem very likely to be recognized realistically.

[Anchor]
The possibility of an unprecedented occurrence of an incumbent president being arrested is growing. Is there any possibility that President Yoon will voluntarily appear before he is arrested?

[Sonho]
I hope so. But I'm very worried that there's a greater possibility that it won't happen. In a statement, he said he would fight back confidently and respond to the investigation.Considering that Ma did not cooperate properly with the delivery process after that and did not respond, it does not seem likely that he would respond to the request for attendance from the Senior Civil Servant Corruption Investigations Unit.

However, in this situation, if President Yoon attends, it is not difficult to predict the subsequent procedures if he responds to the request for attendance. Because an arrest warrant has been issued now. And after arrest, you have to request an arrest warrant or release it within 48 hours. However, in principle, there are cases where you can't find it no matter how much you blow it or you think you'll run away, so you make an arrest by an arrest warrant, then get answers through various questions and release them after that.

However, with various confusion and controversy over the request and issuance of warrants now, it seems unlikely that they will be released after the investigation. Therefore, if an arrest is made, an arrest warrant will be filed immediately after that, and if an arrest warrant is filed, an arrest warrant is expected to be issued, and in that case, investigations and prosecutions are likely to lead to acquittal.

If so, President Yoon's side will not know these parts. Of course, they actively refute it through discourse and appeal that there is no legal problem.There will be people around you who are in charge of objective legal analysis. When I see these things, I guess they will resist to the end and hold on to the end.

[Anchor]
The Senior Civil Servant Corruption Investigations Unit also requested an arrest warrant and a search warrant for the presidential residence at the same time. This was also issued by the court. Should I say that the request for a search warrant from the Senior Civil Servant Corruption Investigations Unit is expected to be opposed by the security service?

[Sonho]
You need to understand the context of this part. Because under our Criminal Procedure Act, you can also search when you make an arrest. I could do it, but there was a problem. In the past, the railway union went on strike, but the railway union went on strike and hid in the office of the Korean Confederation of Trade Unions at that time. In such a situation, the police who obtained an arrest warrant entered the scene and tried to arrest him, but failed. In that situation, arrest is to go and catch them.

But if you're not moving, you can catch it. However, if you hide, seek refuge, or flee, you have to find or follow them and arrest them. Therefore, according to the regulations at the time, it was possible to search when arresting by arrest warrant. But if you think carefully, warrantism is the principle.
But I'm sure I was able to get a search warrant. However, without issuing a search warrant at the time, he conducted a search only with an arrest warrant. However, the Constitutional Court later judged that there was a problem with this part. Eventually, the constitutional inconsistency decision came out at the time, and the decision was made to amend the law, and the law was revised accordingly.

Therefore, in the case of emergency arrest, it is inevitably operated by searching and obtaining a follow-up warrant when an emergency arrest is made, but an arrest warrant was issued by requesting the court in advance. In that case, the possibility of a search can also be known.

If so, since the Criminal Procedure Act has been revised to the effect that a search warrant must be issued in advance, it seems that the search will be mandatory to arrest President Yoon, and if so, it seems to be in accordance with the current regulations that require a search warrant to be issued in advance.

[Anchor]
They say that if you make an arrest, you have 48 hours to secure a recruit. After that, you'll have to ask for an arrest warrant to secure a new recruit. Will the incumbent president be arrested?

[Sonho]
Personally, I think the possibility of arrest is very high. Therefore, it seems that President Yoon does not respond to the request for attendance from the Senior Civil Servant Corruption Investigations Unit. And no arrest warrant is issued or dismissed by likes or dislikes of any particular person.

It's not determined by the evaluation of political action. Under the current law, legal judgments are made on whether there is a need for arrest or whether there are requirements for issuing an arrest warrant, but looking at the current situation, I even think that the requirements for issuing an arrest warrant are already sufficiently met.

[Anchor]
Let's stop here. So far, I've been with lawyer Sohn So-ho. Thank you for talking today.