Mysterious men who showed up in the presidential office..."Click" to the defense commander's testimony. [Y Record]

■ Host: anchor Lee Se-na, anchor Park Seok-won
■ Appearances: lawyer Kim Kwang-sam, lawyer Kim Sung-soo

* 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> Controversy is brewing on the 3rd as it is known that ordinary soldiers from the Army's radiation force were mobilized during the execution of the first arrest warrant. Let's listen to the testimony.

[Ha Young-kyu / Ministry of National Defense spokesperson (Yesterday): (If our military ordered 'Don't clash with police' and the security office gave conflicting orders such as 'Human shield, put your arms in this way,' I wonder who will be under the control of the 55th Guard.) For now, the authority to control the troops rests with the security service. However, because they are our subordinated units, the vice minister gave the commanders on the spot on the day (the 3rd) that it is not appropriate to physically collide with the police.]

[Kim Do-kyun / Former Capital Defense Commander (MBC's 'Kim Jong-bae's Attention' : (If you look at the report now, there was a story that 'they are soldiers wearing group uniforms with no names written on them'), but the security service claim turns out not to be true. If you look at these people on the screen, the people in black padded coats and hats are seen as troops in that unit.... The 55th Guard Corps and the 33rd Military Police Battalion were deployed under the Security Act to guard the outskirts of Hannam-dong residence, not to be mobilized for such illegal activities. I would strongly say that our military forces should never carry out such orders in the future.]

◇ Anchor> The 55th Guard has been sent in, but the security department insists that it's not.As you have seen, there are also related videos that the former commander of the defense command has been confirmed to have 55 guards. They are saying this, but if this is confirmed, the relevant evidence is clearly revealed, what will happen?

◆Kim Kwang-sam> Isn't that what the president's security agency says? Since this is a harm to the president, we have to protect him under the Security Service Act. Then, if you presuppose the Security Service Act, of course, you can think of the 55th Guard Corps as the 33rd Military Police Battalion, which is the same as the military police. That's why I'm doing this, saying I can call him and protect him. So if there's a force outside that is trying to do something harm to the president's body in a normal case under the Security Service Act, then this wouldn't be a problem. However, the purpose of security under the Security Service Act is to eliminate and prevent external harm, and there is a law on the security of the president. In order to perform this, the security chief exists. However, the president is saying that the arrest warrant itself is illegal, but the arrest warrant has been issued for now. Then it's legally promoted. In order to overturn this, it is supposed to be legal now, although it should be proved illegal later through the court, and the result is now legal. Then, is it the subject of security to prevent a legal arrest warrant issued by the court? That's not the case. An arrest warrant is not a harm to the president, it's law enforcement. Therefore, there is a provision that the Security Service should not mobilize such military forces, and such things should not be abused by authority under the Security Service Act. It may be an abuse of authority or an abuse of authority under the criminal law. It can interfere with the execution of special public affairs, and there is a lot of room for various laws to be applied. So first of all, it's not right to mobilize a battalion of military police, whether it's a guard or not.

◇ Anchor> Legitimate, illegal. There are different opinions on both sides on each issue, so how about acting President Choi Sang-mok? The Democratic Party of Korea defined it as an act of rebellion after seeing that Acting President Choi Sang-mok did not instruct the Security Service to cooperate with the execution of the warrant. He said he would file a complaint against him on charges of dereliction of duty. What do you think of it legally? allegations of dereliction of duty

◆Kim Sung-soo> In the case of abandonment of duties under the Criminal Act, abandonment of duties may be established if a person is not obligated to perform a certain duty. Therefore, if there is a complaint or something like that for dereliction of duty, it will be necessary to see if there is a duty obligation, and in the case of acting authority Choi Sang-mok, there is a request for cooperation in the security service, so if so, you should see if you are obligated to make a request. I'm sure there will be authority. This is because if you look at the Government Organization Act and the Presidential Security Act, the director can supervise the security service under the Presidential Security Act, and if you look at the Government Organization Act, the president can supervise the head of the central administrative agency, so you can supervise the head of the security service. Therefore, it can be seen that the authority belongs to the acting president, Choi Sang-mok. If so, it can be an issue whether it is an obligation to order this and if it is considered an obligation, it can be possible to establish a crime of dereliction, but if it is not, it will not be a crime, so there may be legal disputes in the end, and the key to that part will eventually be whether it can be viewed as an obligation.





Excerpted from the conversation: Lee Mi-young, editor of the digital news team

#YRecord