When will the arrest warrant be re-executed?From the 14th day of the impeachment trial,

■ Host: Anchor Jung Ji-woong
■ Starring: Attorney Seo Jeong-bin

* 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 attempt to execute the arrest warrant for Yoon Suk Yeol's president has been breathless since early yesterday morning, but it was finally canceled in five and a half hours. The Senior Civil Servant Corruption Investigations Unit, which expressed regret over the suspect's attitude, is expected to execute the arrest warrant again within the validity period, which is until the 6th of Moraine. In the midst of this, the Constitutional Court, which has an eight-member system, held the second hearing preparation date for the impeachment trial of President Yoon yesterday. Let's connect experts to point out various legal issues surrounding the execution of arrest warrants and the impeachment trial. I'm on the phone to lawyer Seo Jeong-bin. Lawyer, you're out, right?

[Jeongbin Seo]
How are you?

[Anchor]
Yesterday, it eventually failed, but if the search and arrest warrants for President Yoon had been executed properly without the deterrence of the police, how would the investigation process have progressed?

[Jeongbin Seo]
If the arrest warrant had been executed, President Yoon Suk Yeol would have been transferred to the Senior Civil Servant Corruption Investigations Unit for questioning. As the Senior Civil Servant Corruption Investigations Unit prepared more than 100 pages of questions, it was expected that the investigation would have been conducted quite intensely, and that President Yoon would have been accommodated in the Seoul Detention Center when the investigation was over. And it seems that he would have requested an arrest warrant before the end of the 48 hours after the arrest.

[Anchor]
There were 30 personnel from the Senior Civil Servant Corruption Investigations Unit who executed the warrant yesterday. There were 120 police personnel, a total of about 150, and I think each of them had a role. Please explain how it differs.

[Jeongbin Seo]
In the beginning, 30 personnel from the Senior Civil Servant Corruption Investigations Unit and 50 of the police personnel entered the compound of the official residence, and the remaining 70 police were waiting outside. So, as the Airborne Division was issued a warrant for President Yoon, it seems that the Airborne Division personnel were mainly used to execute the warrant, and 50 police personnel were used to support it. [Anchor] Yesterday, after about 5 1/2 hours of confrontation, the Senior Civil Servant Corruption Investigations Unit declared the suspension of execution at 1:30 p.m. and withdrew with police personnel. The execution deadline for the arrest warrant is the day after tomorrow. It's not enough time because it's until the 6th. What's the reason for this withdrawal?

[Jeongbin Seo]
The Senior Civil Servant Corruption Investigations Unit decided that it was virtually impossible to execute the arrest warrant due to the continued confrontation and suspended the execution because of concerns about the safety of the field personnel. At that time, it was said that they approached within 200m of the presidential residence, but buses and other security officials blocked the entrance by scrumming, and there were also large and small physical fights. Also, some employees had personal firearms. In the end, it seems that the execution was suspended under the judgment that the safety of the personnel could not be guaranteed because a considerable physical conflict was expected for execution.

[Anchor]
There is a legal basis for the security service to prevent the execution of the warrant. Articles 110 and 111 of the Criminal Procedure Act. What's this about?

[Jeongbin Seo]
Both regulations stipulate exceptions to search and seizure. It is a regulation that requires the approval of the person in charge when searching for a place requiring military secrets or confiscating items related to the confidentiality of a public official's duties. The Security Service held up the rules as one of the reasons for preventing the execution of the warrant, so the presidential residence is a place where military secrets should be maintained, but the execution of the warrant was illegal because the search was not approved.

[Anchor]
The warrant judge stated in the arrest warrant that these two provisions do not apply in this case. There was a controversy between the Senior Civil Servant Corruption Investigations Unit and President Yoon's lawyers over this, so please organize this as well.

[Jeongbin Seo]
The judge in charge of the Western District Court, who issued the warrant, issued an arrest search warrant and said the two rules of the Criminal Procedure Act do not apply. However, it is also true that this is an unusual content that is hard to find. Although the Senior Civil Servant Corruption Investigations Unit is a legitimate warrant, Yoon Suk Yeol's lawyers have protested that it is an illegal warrant containing information that the judge has no authority, and have demanded the exclusion of the judge's duties and filed an objection.

[Anchor]
The lawyer has mentioned that it is unprecedented, but then the issuance of the warrant itself is invalid, is it the basis for it to be considered like this?

[Jeongbin Seo]
In fact, I am making such a claim, but in my personal opinion, I did not write this information, but there was no difference in executing the arrest warrant. So, in my opinion, even if there was a content, the warrant itself and the act of issuing the warrant itself are not at the level of invalidation.

[Anchor]
There are two days left before the execution of the warrant. When will we try to execute it again?

[Seo Jung-bin]
I'm predicting that it will be executed tomorrow at least before the deadline expires, but this is only a prediction regarding the timing. From the point of view of the Senior Civil Servant Corruption Investigations Unit, if the warrant is not executed within the deadline, it can be considered to re-request an arrest warrant or even immediately request an arrest warrant. Therefore, it is possible to emphasize the circumstances that it was not executed due to backlash despite multiple attempts, not just one execution, and to proceed with the process of re-requesting an arrest warrant or requesting an arrest warrant based on this.

[Anchor]
He explained that even if the execution is not carried out this time, it is not invalid, but there is a plan to re-claim the warrant. The warrant request was the Western District Court. There were also workshops on both sides of this. How will the jurisdiction court requesting a warrant come to a decision?

[Jeongbin Seo]
First of all, according to the Criminal Procedure Act, arrest warrants are generally issued by the court having jurisdiction over the place where the crime occurred, the address of the suspect, or the present. Therefore, the Senior Civil Servant Corruption Investigations Unit requested a warrant from the Western District Court based on the residence of the President of Yoon Suk Yeol. In this regard, President Yoon is raising the issue by listening to the provisions of the Senior Civil Servant Corruption Investigations Unit Act, not the Criminal Procedure Act. In fact, the regulations are not for arrest warrants, but the Seoul Central District Court is in charge of cases in which the Senior Civil Servant Corruption Investigations Unit prosecutes, and if so, the arrest warrant should have been requested here, but the so-called judge's shopping is in this position.

[Anchor]
Critics say that the investigation by the Senior Civil Servant Corruption Investigations Unit and Cooperation Agency is weak over the failure to execute the arrest warrant. What do you think about this?

[Jeongbin Seo]
In my opinion, given that the execution of this arrest warrant has been suspended, I think it is difficult to immediately question the will of the investigation. There was a question of whether the Senior Civil Servant Corruption Investigations Unit would seek an arrest warrant, but it is true that he eventually requested an arrest warrant and attempted to execute it. Therefore, it seems that the failure to complete the execution was to prevent serious physical conflict, and if an armed conflict occurred during the execution of the warrant, I think the loss of life could not be ignored at that time and could be criticized as well. Therefore, in the end, I think it is a little unreasonable to immediately judge that there is no will to investigate because I think it can be seen that the execution was suspended in consideration of the specific field situation.

[Anchor]
In connection with this, the police special investigation team ordered the head of the security and the head of the security to appoint the deputy chief on charges of obstructing the execution of special public affairs and attend. First of all, will attendance be done properly, and what kind of surveys will be conducted if you do?

[Jeongbin Seo]
Matters related to the obstruction of the execution of special public affairs once attendance. So, it is expected to investigate the reasons and grounds for preventing the arrest warrant, who made the judgment, whether there were other orders other than the security service, and what orders were given to employees. But I don't think I'll attend right away before then. There is a possibility that there is no time to prepare for an investigation because the attempt to execute an arrest warrant took place just yesterday, or that he could not attend to carry out presidential security. In addition, the security service claims that the execution of the warrant yesterday was an illegal procedure without permission, so I don't think he will immediately attend considering these circumstances.

[Anchor]
Yesterday, the Senior Civil Servant Corruption Investigations Unit, or the head of the Presidential Security Service, presented an arrest warrant to Chief of Security Park Jong-joon, but the Chief of Security refused to do so, right? Is there a possibility that this part will be covered as well?

[Jeongbin Seo]
There is a good chance that such a part will also be dealt with. In the end, it is suspected of interfering with the overall execution of the arrest warrant, so if you attend, you will also be investigating this part, including all of them.

[Anchor]
This time, we will also look at the progress of President Yoon's impeachment trial. Until yesterday, the hearing preparation date was held for the second time. Please explain the procedure called the hearing preparation date first.

[Jeongbin Seo]
The hearing preparation period procedure refers to a schedule prepared in advance to smoothly proceed with the upcoming full-fledged hearing period. So first, we check the issues that will be dealt with in the future, and then we organize the issues that will be made or subtracted from the issues through arguments from both sides. In addition to that, it will decide whether to adopt the evidence already submitted and confirm the verification plan of both sides in the future. For example, it is a procedure to organize these things, such as who to call witnesses in the future and what evidence to add and submit.

[Anchor]
The National Assembly's impeachment committee and Yoon's representatives are expected to face off, so what size and who will each be composed of?

[Jeongbin Seo]
To briefly explain, the impeachment committee, which includes 11 opposition lawmakers, is supporting the National Assembly, led by Chung Chung-rae, chairman of the Legislative and Judiciary Committee, and Kim Yi-soo, former head of the Constitutional Court and acting head of the Constitutional Court, are representative of the legal representatives. And it is composed of 17 lawyers, including former Constitutional Judge Song Doo-hwan. On the other hand, Yoon's representatives are known to have attended the second hearing because they include Yoon senior, junior, and former constitutional researchers, including Yoon Sang-class and Bae Bo-yoon, as well as newly appointed lawyers.

[Anchor]
It is said that the arguments of the two sides present at the hearing were tense, what about the core arguments of the two sides?

[Jeongbin Seo]
First of all, regarding the declaration of emergency martial law, the National Assembly is arguing that the reason is not recognized and that it is illegal and unconstitutional in terms of content. On the contrary, President Yoon's side argues that the declaration of emergency martial law is legal and constitutional, and that it is an act of governance. In addition to this, it was originally included in the original prosecution regarding the specific civil war charges, but the National Assembly recently said that it should actually withdraw it and judge only the declaration of emergency martial law itself, which seems to be for the rapid progress of the judgment. On the other hand, President Yoon's side claims that the impeachment proceeding was based on the establishment of the rebellion, but that the impeachment is wrong to say that they will not fight it. In addition, on the part of President Yoon, the impeachment prosecution violated the absence of double jeopardy under the National Assembly Act. Or, they are pleading in various aspects, such as that there is a problem in recognizing the ability to testify in the minutes of the National Assembly.

[Anchor]
News came out yesterday that the Constitutional Court adopted the National Assembly's request to secure the December 3 emergency martial law investigation records. What do you think this means?

[Jeongbin Seo]
First of all, the National Assembly requested that each investigative agency send the records of the investigation on the emergency martial law case currently held by each investigative agency, and the court accepted it. The original investigation record cannot be secured without the request of an competent authority such as the court or the Constitutional Court. So, the National Assembly requested that these investigation records be used as important evidence in determining whether to impeach them, and the Constitutional Court acknowledged them. Regarding this, President Yoon asked not to send the investigation records due to issues such as the burden of proof, but the court did not accept the claim, saying there was no problem under the relevant laws. In the end, if the investigation records are secured, the National Assembly is expected to strengthen the reasons for impeachment based on this, and the Constitutional Court seems to believe that this is also a very important issue to look into.

[Anchor]
Now, the Constitutional Court will complete the preparation process for the defense and begin a full-fledged trial on the 14th. Now, the hearing date schedule has come out, and it is said that it will be held four times in January and once in February, so how will the Constitutional Court's impeachment trial proceed in the future?

[Jeongbin Seo]
First of all, it seems that it will proceed fairly quickly. In the second hearing preparation period yesterday, Yoon Suk Yeol's lawyers asked for another hearing preparation period to reveal the proof plan. However, the court summarized that the application for additional evidence will be adopted at the hearing date in the future, so the preparation date will end with this. The Constitutional Court has expressed its intention to proceed with the trial quickly in the future even in the first preparation period, and this time, it can be seen as an indication of its intention to prevent delays, so although it is not possible to accurately predict when the trial will end in the future, it is expected to proceed very quickly with promptness in mind.

[Anchor]
Finally, it's the day after tomorrow. There is also news that the Constitutional Court, which has an eight-member system, will hold its first meeting of judges. Other than the presidential impeachment trial, isn't there a lot of pending issues in the Constitutional Court? What will be discussed at the meeting?

[Jeongbin Seo]
First of all, it is expected to discuss the future plans of the most important impeachment trial of President Yoon. In fact, we discussed the basic deadline and procedure through a meeting of judges before, but now that the preparation date for the defense is over, it is expected to discuss in detail how to proceed with the future date. There are many other issues, but among them, there is a constitutional petition filed against the failure of Acting Chief Justice Choi Sang-mok to appoint a constitutional judge. In this regard, the Constitutional Court also recently expressed its position to conduct a prompt hearing, so I think that the discussion of the progress plan for the case will be conducted in considerable detail.

[Anchor]
I see. I'll stop listening to it. We talked with lawyer Seo Jeong-bin about executing the president's arrest warrant and the impeachment trial.