Senior Civil Servant Corruption Investigations Unit "Yoon's arrest failed"...What's the next option?

■ Host: anchor Lee Hyun-woong
■ Starring: lawyer 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]
Next, we will point out the related information with lawyer Seo Jeong-bin. Please come in. The Senior Civil Servant Corruption Investigations Unit has been moving very urgently since dawn yesterday. But in the end, he couldn't execute the arrest warrant. How did you look yesterday compared to the usual execution of arrest warrants?

[Jeongbin Seo]
First of all, it was not possible to find examples before that. First of all, the execution of arrest warrants for the incumbent president was unprecedented, and the situation in which security officials confronted investigative agencies for more than five hours during the execution process was not seen before. In general, when a cause of death is executed, most of them respond smoothly when the investigative agency reaches where the suspect is located, or after holding out for a while at first, they are eventually arrested and transferred. So, although the situation like yesterday was actually expected, it is true that it is a very unusual situation.

[Anchor]
There were three security guards yesterday. We just heard from the Democratic Party.There are also criticisms that Ma claimed to be a private soldier in a civil war. Can we consider yesterday's security to be the security according to the law? [Seo Jeong-bin] First of all, it's true that it's security by the law itself. Security for the president can be carried out under the Presidential Security Act, and according to relevant laws, the security chief can establish a security zone and deploy personnel or operate specific operations there. So, yesterday's triple manpower deployment was primarily implemented according to the law and the authority of the security chief, but specifically, the security and airlift agencies are now at odds with each other over whether it is legal to prevent such manpower deployment without releasing it during the execution of the warrant.

[Anchor]
It is said that there was also a physical fight while crossing the cordon yesterday. He said there were personnel with personal firearms, but in this regard, it can be said that the execution of the warrant was suspended for fear of an unexpected situation, right?

[Jeongbin Seo]
That's right. At that time, it was said that he approached about 200 meters inside the official residence, and in front of him, about 200 bus and security officials planned scrums and blocked them from entering, and there were also large and small physical fights, and some employees were carrying personal firearms. In the end, the Senior Civil Servant Corruption Investigations Unit decided that it was virtually impossible to execute the arrest warrant, and on the other hand, suspended the execution, saying that the safety of the field personnel was a problem. In the end, it was a situation where considerable physical collisions were expected before actual execution, so it is correct to say that it was eventually stopped from a safety perspective to prevent damage to such personnel.

[Anchor]
Some point out that if the Senior Civil Servant Corruption Investigations Unit had a clear will, it should have taken a little more people. There is even an interpretation of building a justification, what do you think?

[Jeongbin Seo]
First of all, regarding the will of the investigation, I think this situation alone yesterday is a little insufficient to judge it. In fact, President Yoon has refuted that there is no legal basis for the Senior Civil Servant Corruption Investigations Unit to direct the police, so the Senior Civil Servant Corruption Investigations Unit may have limited the number of police personnel to the level of support, and even if yesterday's execution was suspended, it is a little too early to say that there is no will to investigate. On the one hand, there is also talk of building a justification, and as a result, it seems to have that meaning. In fact, the direction that the Senior Civil Servant Corruption Investigations Unit can think about in the future will be to request an arrest warrant again, but there will also be a request for an arrest warrant. However, in requesting such an arrest warrant, the fact that he was blocked after attempting to execute the warrant once or twice can be a scene that shows that there is a need for arrest when requesting an arrest warrant.

[Anchor]
The chief of security has prevented the execution and search of warrants by the Senior Civil Servant Corruption Investigations Unit due to the security law and the security area, is the legal basis okay?

[Jeongbin Seo]
I think this basis itself is a little poor. The relevant regulations stipulate what security means in the activities of the security service and that security can be carried out by setting up security zones and designating them if necessary, but these regulations can actually prevent even the execution of warrants. There isn't. Therefore, I think these regulations alone are a rather poor logic to be seen as a refutable basis for executing a warrant.

[Anchor]
However, it is stated that the legal dispute over the arrest warrant is exceptional to the provisions of the Criminal Procedure Act. How do you see this?

[Jeongbin Seo]
In fact, such a description is very unusual. It is also controversial because there is no provision that such things can be written according to the law, and President Yoon's side is protesting that such unnecessary writing is an illegal warrant after all. Before that, there is no exception to the execution of the arrest warrant itself, so I think this is actually an useless statement. So, it is a little disappointing that this part was recorded and eventually caused another controversy.

[Anchor]
Articles 110 and 111 of the Criminal Procedure Act, and as a result, the president and the ruling party are protesting that they are overpowering. You just said it's another controversy, what do you think?

[Jeongbin Seo]
In fact, it will be a little difficult to judge easily because there are no comparable cases before that whether this is an excess or not. Furthermore, such a description is legally illegal. Or even if it was an unnecessary description, if so, whether such a warrant itself is effective can be another matter. Some argue that the warrant itself is illegal, and others argue that it is legal. In fact, I think there is a little difficulty in judging whether this is an excess or not by comparing it with other things in the current situation.

[Anchor]
Since it is unprecedented, it is difficult to find a comparative precedent, and there are so many issues in each position. Before the execution of the warrant, President Yoon applied to the Constitutional Court for a power dispute trial and an injunction to suspend its effectiveness. Can this be considered a legitimate objection procedure?

[Jeongbin Seo]
I think it's a little meaningless or low-level means. When an arrest warrant is issued, in principle, the legality can be determined through an arrest suit under the Criminal Procedure Act. However, in the case of an arrest suit, the proceedings are carried out with the suspect arrested, so it seems that the lawyers applied for a power dispute trial or a provisional disposition for suspension of effect before that. First of all, in the case of a power dispute trial, when a dispute arises between state agencies, a claim is made to the Constitutional Court to determine the end or scope of such authority. However, the president claims that the request for an arrest warrant by the Senior Civil Servant Corruption Investigations Unit violates the president's authority to protect the constitution or declare martial law. So, if this is eventually judged, it is not enough for the claim to be cited, so I think that the suspension of the effect applied together is also insufficient to be recognized for the same reason.

[Anchor]
The security office is said to have had some physical fights while building walls, but didn't you send an official letter to the effect that if the Senior Civil Servant Corruption Officer Oh Dong-woon blocks the execution, he can apply a crime of obstructing the execution of special public affairs? Could this be a crime of obstruction of the execution of special public affairs?

[Jeongbin Seo]
Of course, there is a big dispute over whether the execution of the warrant by the Senior Civil Servant Corruption Investigations Unit, which is a premise, is legal. If this part is resolved and the execution of such a warrant is judged legitimate, furthermore, there is a possibility that this may constitute a crime of obstruction of the execution of special public affairs. In the case of obstruction of the execution of special public affairs, it is believed that it is possible to establish it even if the investigative agency stops the execution of the warrant in a physical way. Even if there was a physical fight, the possibility is higher.

[Anchor]
In the meantime, the police asked the chief of security and the deputy chief of security to attend, and they did not respond, saying they could not leave for a moment. What do you think about the applicable charges and punishments for the security chief?

[Jeongbin Seo]
First of all, it is expected that charges will be filed or an investigation will be conducted on the issue of obstruction of the execution of special public affairs. Of course, there's been a controversy so far.Since the investigative agency and the court have executed the warrant on the premise that the request and issuance of such a warrant by the Senior Civil Servant Corruption Investigations Unit is legitimate, the contents of the security agency are likely to be a little less persuasive, and if so, I think there is a possibility that there is a possibility that the obstruction of the execution of public affairs will be established because he is the command authority to prevent the execution of such a warrant through employees.

[Anchor]
The Democratic Party of Korea also accused Park Jong-joon, chief of security, of rebellion, and is there a possibility that such charges will be applied?

[Jeongbin Seo]
According to the complaint filed by the Democratic Party of Korea, Park Jong-joon, the chief of security, reportedly brought Cho Ji-ho, the chief of the National Police Agency, and Kim Bong-sik, the chief of the Seoul Metropolitan Police Agency, to the safety house three hours before the emergency martial law. So, please investigate whether you participated in the civil war or not, this seems to be the content. In fact, if this is the case, it is necessary to check whether the content is authentic, and furthermore, I think whether the degree to which this movement was helped can be considered to have participated in the crime of rebellion, and in fact, it is a little insufficient to go that far. So at this stage, it is necessary to investigate the specific role of the charges related to this civil war, and at the moment, it is a little difficult to predict the specific content of the charges or even the possibility of punishment.

[Anchor]
It seems that the possibility of punishment is uncertain, but how does the security service plan to respond now?

[Jeongbin Seo]
Even though there was a request for attendance today, I did not attend, and if so, I think I will not respond to the investigation for security reasons in the process of such an investigation in the future. At the same time, I think we will have a preparatory procedure to prepare for these investigations in advance in the future, but this seems to be a matter to be watched in the future.

[Anchor]
Given that the prerequisites mentioned above are resolved, is there a possibility that those personnel who blocked the execution of the warrant by supervisory orders will also be punished?

[Jeongbin Seo]
It may be legally possible, but personally, I think it would be a little difficult to punish even such employees. Of course, in our court, when a clearly unfair instruction is received, the employees underneath are not exempted from responsibility if they perform it. So, we judge that if it becomes a criminal act, we should punish it. In this case, both sides are at odds over whether it is legal, that is, whether the execution of the warrant, and if so, it was quite difficult for such employees who work under them to determine whether the supervisor's instructions were clearly illegal or not. So, considering this, I think it will be a little difficult to punish employees for whether they will actually proceed to investigation or prosecution, or even punish them.

[Anchor]
The Democratic Party of Korea said once again that it emphasizes that it is a heavy crime that can cause disadvantages and all pension benefits disappear, is there a possibility of deprivation of pensions?

[Jeongbin Seo]
Of course, this is a story when the crime of obstruction of justice was established and punished. Of course, pensions are not deprived of unconditional criminal punishment, for example, when they are sentenced to imprisonment or higher, they are deprived of their right to pension. It is a little questionable whether such strong punishment will be imposed on these employees, so I think it is right to interpret this as a warning anyway.

[Anchor]
Even if you look at what you heard a while ago before the Democratic Party's general meeting, there was a voice urging Acting President Choi Sang-mok to cooperate with the execution of the security service's warrant. Can Acting President Choi Sang-mok lead the security service legally?

[Jeongbin Seo]
That's right. First of all, I think it is right to see that the president can direct the security service as the head of the administration, and the acting president who acts as an acting president has the authority to conduct such command just like the president. That's why it seems that the Senior Civil Servant Corruption Investigations Unit and the Democratic Party are urging them to exercise their authority.

[Anchor]
Anyway, the execution deadline for the arrest warrant is Monday. It's until the 6th, but there are definitely time constraints. It can be burdensome for the Senior Civil Servant Corruption Investigations Unit, but will the next execution continue?

[Jeongbin Seo]
I think it will continue once more. In fact, as mentioned earlier, this could be an element of justification, but considering the future direction of the investigation, if the investigation is suspended now, it may be difficult to conduct a detailed investigation. Then, you should consider re-claiming an arrest warrant or even requesting an arrest warrant. To do so, we will execute it one more time, and of course, if successful, we will proceed with the investigation accordingly, but even if we fail, we may try to get a warrant even more because we refuse to do so.

[Anchor]
It's until the 6th. Except for Monday and the day, there are only weekends left. How can we forecast the timing if it's re-executed today and tomorrow?

[Jeongbin Seo]
This is not actually a legal part, so I'm just a prediction to some extent, but if I think it's a little burdensome to execute it on the last day, I think I'll try to execute it around Sunday, so tomorrow. I'm simply expecting it like this.

[Anchor]
Do you have a view of the time zone as well?

[Jeongbin Seo]
There are talks about night execution, but the head of the Senior Civil Servant Corruption Investigations Unit once said that he would keep manners toward the president, and on the other hand, considering the risks that may arise from night execution, isn't it at least a little difficult to execute at night? If so, in the end, I think it will be executed in the morning or during the week.

[Anchor]
Anyway, if we go to re-execution again, there will be a possibility of collision, concerns about life damage, and so on. What options can the Senior Civil Servant Corruption Investigations Unit choose after 6 days?

[Jeongbin Seo]
Similarly, there are methods such as re-requesting arrest warrants or requesting arrest warrants, but based on the current atmosphere, even if the arrest warrant is re-requested and issued, the possibility of execution will still be low, and if so, the Senior Civil Servant Corruption Investigations Unit expects that it will eventually choose to request an arrest warrant.

[Anchor]
I'm asking for an arrest warrant right away, so will the president cooperate?

[Jeongbin Seo]
In fact, if the current situation continues, it seems a little unclear whether or not to comply with it even if an arrest warrant is requested. When an arrest warrant is originally requested, the parties will appear and plead the reasons why they should not be issued an arrest warrant and defend themselves as best they can. However, in the end, the possibility of an arrest warrant cannot be ruled out, so I think I am thinking about how to stop the execution even if an arrest warrant is issued while maintaining the current state in the first place, so it is difficult for me to predict exactly how it will go out.

[Anchor]
On the other hand, the second preparation date was held at the Constitutional Court yesterday. Is it possible to say that the impeachment trial issue and evidence are finalized?

[Jeongbin Seo]
That's right. First, it seems to have been completed first. Regarding the issue, the National Assembly insisted that it would exclude the charge of rebellion, one of the reasons for the impeachment, so it seems to have been virtually withdrawn to some extent, and the key issue will eventually be whether martial law declaration is unconstitutional. And both sides have also revealed future proof plans. Of course, this does not mean that everything has been organized in the future hearing period. In the future, we can present additional evidence or methods of proof as we proceed with the pleading date, but first of all, those procedures and plans have been organized once.

[Anchor]
The first formal defense has been set for 2 p.m. on the 14th. And after that, the defense will be held twice a week, how fast is it compared to before?

[Jeongbin Seo]
In fact, when comparing the two impeachment trials against the president in the past, it is expected to proceed twice a week or up to three times if necessary. However, the last impeachment trials were conducted quite quickly. In the case of President Park Geun Hye, for example, the conclusion was made almost three months after the prosecution. Then, seeing these similar procedures, it seems that he is trying to make a quick decision on the conclusion.

[Anchor]
According to the Constitutional Court Act, the parties must attend the formal hearing, but what happens if they do not attend?

[Jeongbin Seo]
As you said, first of all, the party must attend on the pleading date, but if he does not attend, the court must set the date once again. And he does not attend even on the re-determined date. If so, you can have a hearing without attendance from then on. [Anchor] Okay. We talked with lawyer Seo Jeong-bin about the main issues. I think we need to wait and see the progress after the 14th. I'll cut it short here. Thank you.

[Jeongbin Seo]
Thank you.