Arrest warrants are about to be executed...Park Jong-joon, former chief of security, 2nd investigation

■ Host: Anchor Jeong Chae-woon, anchor Hwang Ji-yeon
■ Telephone connection: Attorney 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 Newswide] when quoting.

[Anchor]
With the execution of an arrest warrant for President Yoon Suk Yeol imminent, former Presidential Security Service Director Park Jong-joon attended the National Police Agency yesterday and returned home after a second investigation. This week, the first hearing of the Constitutional Court in the case of President Yoon's impeachment will be held. Let me point out the main issues with lawyer Kim Sung-soo. It's connected by phone. Is the lawyer here?

[Kim Sung-soo]
Hello, I'm Kim Sung-soo.

[Anchor]
Hello. First of all, Park Jong-joon, the former chief of security, has been investigated by the police for a long time twice so far. The resignation letter was accepted during the investigation. Can we say that the need to secure personal safety has decreased as we lose our current status?

[Kim Sung-soo]
At first, there was a lot of opinion that the police had room to first secure the whereabouts of the head of the security service through emergency arrest or warrant issuance against former Chief Park Jong-joon. However, it can be said that former Chief Park Jong-joon resigned from his position as the police chief and attended, and for an emergency arrest, the urgency of not receiving a warrant should be recognized and there is a risk of destroying evidence or fleeing.

[Anchor]
Director Park expressed his resignation and even repaired it. There is a possibility of applying for an arrest warrant. Are you accused of obstructing the execution of special services?

[Kim Sung-soo]
The main issue seems to be the obstruction of the execution of special public affairs, and if an arrest warrant is applied, there is a high possibility that the warrant will be applied on the premise that there is a risk of escape or destruction of evidence based on the charge of obstructing the execution of special public affairs. However, given that no arrest warrant or emergency arrest has been reviewed, it is expected that there is a possibility of destroying evidence or escaping during the investigation, so it is necessary to wait and see how the investigative agency will proceed on this part.

[Anchor]
Chun Dae-yup, the chief of the National Court Administration, told the National Assembly that unprovoked resistance to the security agency can constitute crimes such as obstruction of justice, and Kim Seok-woo, the acting justice minister, also said in such a strong tone, but can I understand that the judiciary continues to clarify its position?

[Kim Sung-soo]
This can be seen as a statement from the head of the court administration or officials, but this opinion itself cannot be seen as representing the position of the entire judiciary. Since it can be seen as an expression of each opinion, it should be distinguished from the position of the entire judiciary, but it is difficult for us to judge that there is such a part in which there is talk that obstruction of justice can be formed in this area, and that this will be the same as the final judgment of the judiciary if the trial takes place.

[Anchor]
Now the bodyguard is headed by Kim Sung-hoon, deputy head of the bodyguard. However, Deputy Chief Kim was also notified of his police attendance, but he did not attend the departure. Do you think there's a possibility of a forced investigation?

[Kim Sung-soo]
In fact, I know that there are reports that the police requested an arrest warrant for Deputy Chief Kim Sung-hoon last night. Therefore, when an arrest warrant is applied, the court will decide whether to issue it or not. So, when deciding whether to issue an arrest warrant, the police and the Senior Civil Servant Corruption Investigations Unit have no choice but to think about the process of executing it, so we have to watch that process, and when a forced investigation takes place, I think it's a part to see if an arrest warrant or even such part will be issued after the arrest warrant.

[Anchor]
There were reports that Deputy Chief Kim, who is in charge of the security service, encouraged employees to mention the recent rebound in President Yoon's approval rating and ordered them to delete internal bulletin boards that could be illegal if they block the execution of the warrant. Are there any relevant legal issues with this act that you instructed to delete?

[Kim Sung-soo]
What you said was that a three-page article was posted on the internal network of the security service. And it is said that the content of the article is that the execution of an arrest warrant is justified, and that it is the obstruction of the execution of public affairs to prevent it. In response to this, Kim ordered the deletion, and as a result, it was deleted. If there is any legal problem with the deletion, criminal punishment can be considered if there is a criminal problem, and if not, punishment may not be reviewed.

[Anchor]
There is a saying that many young employees of the Security Service are agitated, but if the head of the Security Service is arrested or arrested, can the arrest warrant for President Yoon be executed quickly?

[Kim Sung-soo]
It seems that there are various opinions that if the head of the security service says there is a change, the internal atmosphere of the security service may change accordingly. And since it can be seen that the chief of security actually directs the staff of the security service, can't it be seen that the deputy chief of security is currently in charge? Then, some say that Lee's various opinions are hard-liners, but if he is absent for a while, his hard-line position can be changed, so there seem to be various variables.

[Anchor]
As the arrest warrant has been reissued, attention is also being paid to the deadline for the warrant. The Senior Civil Servant Corruption Investigations Unit is reticent about this, but it's reported to be about two to three weeks, which is different from the usual arrest warrant deadline, right?

[Kim Sung-soo]
Usually, about 7 days is the expiration date of the arrest warrant. Last time, the first arrest warrant was also reported on the 7th, right? However, in this case, the exact date is not announced, so it is predicted for a certain period of time, but it seems that there is a saying that it will be about two to three weeks. And even if it's two or three weeks, notifying the warrant period seems to be a part of the investigation's clandestine nature and the possibility of execution within the last seven days in the process of executing the warrant, so in this case, the validity period is not clearly announced.

[Anchor]
The National Investigation Headquarters of the National Police Agency has ordered more than 1,000 front-line investigators who have gathered the heads of the metropolitan area's regional investigation teams, tracked down and arrested gangsters and drug criminals. Is the police showing a strong will to arrest him?

[Kim Sung-soo]
In the process of re-executing arrest warrants, various scenarios are being talked about. One of them is that if the security agency said it would prevent it, it would be possible to arrest the security agency staff one by one and get them out of the scene. For that, police personnel must be mobilized a lot, and detectives must have a lot of experience in arresting the scene and have various know-how, so they ordered a full mobilization to review those parts. It seems that the contents of this official document are not known exactly, but if you asked them to gather on a certain date and where, it can be said that they have planned more specifically. So far, when and where are the detectives still asked to gather? Given that this part does not come out, one of the various proposals can be reviewed and for this purpose, cooperation can be requested like this. I think I've reviewed it for now.

[Anchor]
However, the possibility of physical conflict cannot be ruled out if such a large number of personnel are dispatched and an arrest warrant is executed. However, both sides are stating that physical collisions should be avoided as much as possible, so can we realistically exclude the possibility of such collisions?

[Kim Sung-soo]
If the security service does not stop this part, physical conflict can occur. Since touching a person's body itself can be seen as a physical collision, it may be more important to what extent there is such a physical collision. If this physical collision reaches the point where someone is injured or exerts too much physical force on someone, there is no choice but to look at that part differently. Even if there is a situation where a physical collision is bound to occur, I think we have no choice but to examine whether this physical method is possible to the extent that no one is injured, and eventually, state agencies, security agencies, police, and airborne agencies. In the end, since it is a dispute between state agencies, it may not be appropriate to have a physical conflict on this part itself, so even if there is a physical conflict, we have no choice but to consider a way to exclude it as much as possible. There are also scenarios in which we ask for a change in the position of the leadership to exclude physical conflict, or we eventually give up the deterrence of execution on this part due to long-term siege, so we are reviewing it in various ways, but the overall purpose itself seems to be a part to minimize physical conflict.

[Anchor]
Oh Dong-woon, head of the Airborne Division, said that if a lawmaker interferes with the execution of a warrant, it applies to obstructing the execution of public affairs. Does this mean that if lawmakers of the People's Power build a human wall to prevent execution, they will be arrested as a red-handed offender?

[Kim Sung-soo]
The Constitution has the privilege of not arresting lawmakers. However, if the non-arrest privilege is a current offender, it is excluded. That's why Oh Dong-woon, head of the Airborne Division, said during the National Assembly's questioning that if a lawmaker interferes with the execution of a warrant, he could be arrested as a current offender for obstructing the execution of public affairs.

[Anchor]
This time, let's talk about former Defense Minister Kim Yong-hyun. Former Minister Kim's side believes that the emergency martial law decree No. 1 is still in effect. He also accused some opposition lawmakers, saying that the investigation into the rebellion was a real rebellion and the indictment was a wrong answer note. It is said that the accusation measures will continue, but what part of the accusation measures will be made?

[Kim Sung-soo]
Wasn't this part where martial law was declared and proclamations were distributed at that time? However, if you violate the contents of the decree, there may be a part that can be punished under martial law. And on the former Minister Kim Yong-hyun's side, there was a martial law situation during that period from the declaration of martial law to the lifting of martial law, and violations of the proclamation during this period should be punished as a violation of martial law. So, first of all, on the premise that martial law itself is legitimate martial law and that the content of the decree is also legitimate, if this part was a legitimate martial law period and a legitimate decree, but if this part was violated at that time, it could be punished, and in the end, we continue to accuse each political part of it.

[Anchor]
The opposition party is considering recommending a third party for the independent counsel in connection with the Insurrection Special Prosecutor Act, which has already been rejected by the National Assembly. Do you think there could be a change in the possibility of passing the special prosecution law if the method of recommendation changes like this?

[Kim Sung-soo]
Currently, there is also a dispute over the contents of the provisions regarding the Insurrection Special Prosecutor Act. And one of the main issues was about who would actually recommend the independent counsel candidate, and now the ruling party has been arguing that the recommendation of the independent counsel candidate can only be decided by the opposition party, and if the revision is actually a part that can dispel the opposition party's proposal, the ruling party can also have more opinions. Considering the demand for reconsideration, the issue can be whether it can exceed 200 seats, so if it is possible to obtain consent for more than 200 seats, the possibility of passing the special prosecution law will be a little higher.

[Anchor]
However, the opposition party included foreign exchange attraction charges, saying that it induced North Korean military attacks in the Special Prosecutor's Act on Insurrection. Please point out what the foreign exchange attraction crime is and what the background is.

[Kim Sung-soo]
In the case of the Insurrection Special Prosecutor Act, another issue is how far to investigate through this special prosecutor law of the Insurrection Special Prosecutor Act. However, this time, not only the foreign exchange attraction and rebellion, but also the foreign exchange attraction crime is another controversial issue. In this case, foreign exchange attraction crime can be punished for foreign exchange attraction or foreign exchange crime for acts that try to cause war in Korea by conspiring with foreign countries.

However, since there are suspicions that this special prosecutor law was trying to attract foreign exchange at the time of the declaration of martial law and also to do martial law, if this part is included, there is a possibility that it will be a variable regardless of the candidate's recommendation, and eventually, there is a possibility that 200 seats may not be agreed upon due to disputes over the scope.

[Anchor]
Now let's talk about the impeachment of President Yoon. The first hearing will be held on the 14th and 16th. Why did the Constitutional Court decide to suspend the first-come, first-served distribution of audience tickets?

[Kim Sung-soo]
The first hearing of the impeachment of President Yoon will begin on the 14th. And previously, online audiences and on-site distribution were distributed to actually see the overall trial contents of the court through these two things. However, in this case, there was a lot of application from the Constitutional Court at the time of the existing hearing preparation period, and it seems that they were concerned that safety accidents could eventually occur if they were full on the spot. Therefore, in the case of this anniversary, we are currently expecting about 31 seats through online applications, not on-site distribution, but there are talks that they will be filled with about 31 seats, so in the end, there is no on-site distribution, and we need to look at the parts that we need to apply online for the audience.

[Anchor]
Attention is also focusing on whether President Yoon Suk Yeol will come out in person during the first hearing. I wonder if President Yoon Suk Yeol thinks he will come out and express his opinion in person, and if there is no problem with the trial proceeding normally even if he does not attend.

[Kim Sung-soo]
First of all, five dates have been designated from the 14th and 16th. And since it was President Yoon Suk Yeol's position to attend at an appropriate time, it was my personal opinion that we should attend in person after the issues were settled on the 3rd and 4th rather than the first date, but in the current situation, it is difficult to rule out the possibility of attending on the 14th because the situation is changing every moment.

However, when you attend, you have to see what you have to say about it, so I think you will consider that and if you do not attend, you will not be able to proceed on the first date under the law, and you can proceed with the deadline even if you are not present from the next date, so if so, the deadline could be delayed once.

[Anchor]
On the 9th, Kim Jung-won, secretary-general of the Constitutional Court, attended the National Assembly and said that the martial law proclamation declared during the "December 3 emergency martial law incident" did not conform to the current constitution. Can the other eight constitutional judges be considered to have a common perception?

[Kim Sung-soo]
I think it would be a little difficult to say that this is the story of the Secretary-General of the Constitutional Court and that it is a common perception of the Constitutional Court judges. As for the common perception of the constitutional judges, it is something we have to look at after the decision until a judgment is made, so in the end, just because the secretary-general talked about this part does not mean that it represents the overall opinion of the Constitutional Court. I think it would be accurate to look at it separately like this.

[Anchor]
Finally, controversy continued over whether or not to withdraw the crime of rebellion in the impeachment indictment. The Constitutional Court explained that the exclusion of the rebellion is the area of the judgment of the court. Regardless of the controversy, should I accept it like this that the Constitutional Court will judge on its own?

[Kim Sung-soo]
That's right. Depending on whether it is identical or not, the Constitutional Court can finally determine the appropriateness of the part by judging whether it is excluded from the subject of examination. As a result, the ruling party and the opposition parties are currently expressing various opinions on this, and the National Assembly, the respondent, and the president, the respondent, are also making legal claims on this, so the Constitutional Court will eventually decide on the appropriateness of this part, including this part.

[Anchor]
I see. We talked with lawyer Kim Sung-soo about issues related to the execution of President Yoon's arrest warrant and the impeachment trial. Thank you for talking today.

[Kim Sung-soo]
Thank you.