■ Host: Park Seok-won Anchor
■ Starring: Attorney Lee Seung-hoon, Lawyer Choi Jin-nyeong
* 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]
President Yoon expressed his intention not to attend the Constitutional Court's first formal hearing scheduled for the 14th. I was concerned about my personal safety, but I will take a closer look at the contents related to lawyer Choi Jin-nyeong and lawyer Lee Seung-hoon. President Yoon decided not to attend the first hearing on the 14th. You said you were concerned about your safety, what kind of concern are you?
[Choi Jinyoung]
That's right. In the case of President Yoon Suk Yeol, he said he would attend when the Constitutional Court begins its argument. However, as a prerequisite, the condition of securing personal safety was added. In the end, as things stand, the Senior Civil Servant Corruption Investigations Unit has issued an arrest warrant for the so-called President of Yoon Suk Yeol, and it has not been confirmed on January 14th.Ma seems to have decided that it is the period of execution of the warrant issued by the court. In the end, I think he talked about the potential risk that the arrest can be carried out in the process of leaving his residence, going to the Constitutional Court, pleading, and returning to the Constitutional Court, in the case of President Yoon Suk Yeol's lawyer, there may be a risk to his personal safety.
On top of that, the first thing he said was the president's personal safety department.In the second round, I think it was a comprehensive review of social unrest caused by armed conflict or conflicts between public authorities. In the end, overall, he said he'll continue to attend.E predicts that the time of attendance is likely to be after the end of the arrest warrant period.
[Anchor]
But when the security problem is solved, I said I would go, but then the security problem, aren't there quite a few members in the security service now? Do you think these parts should be added?
[Lee Seung Hoon]
There is a security problem because he is actually suspended from his job and needs an arrest warrant, but he won't go as an excuse for security? This doesn't make sense. Security is security from terrorism, threats, and anxiety, but the court's warrant is not an element of anxiety or illegality. In that respect, you don't need security, but you have to voluntarily walk into the investigative agency, but you don't walk in and fortify your official residence, and to put it in a good way, it's fortifying but actually creating a prison. You build your own prison and the guards there are not monitoring the president of Yoon Suk Yeol, but rather using security agents who protect you. This is true for the president to destroy national dignity, but it also degrades the dignity of the bodyguards. You didn't have a bodyguard to prevent the president from attending the court. It's not a soldier. In that respect, I think it would be nice if the president acted with dignity and at the end with dignity.
[Anchor]
However, President Yoon's side claims that the Constitutional Court's impeachment trial is also fast. What is your opinion on this?
[Lee Seung Hoon]
There was also the former president of Roh Moo Hyun. There was also former President Park Geun Hye, but he was slower than then. At that time, President Roh Moo Hyun had a strong will to protect the constitution, so he took an active role, and former President Park Geun Hye at least knew his faults and gave up active defense. I thought this was to remove the elements of national instability, but now President Yoon Suk Yeol is at the peak of encouraging national instability while still in the position of supreme power. So, how long are you going to make excuses under the Constitutional Court, the police, the prosecution, the Senior Civil Servant Corruption Investigations Unit? I hope the president will keep his words with dignity because he said he would accept it confidently, whether it's an investigation or impeachment.
[Anchor]
The Constitutional Court also expressed its opinion that it is not so fast compared to the precedent, but what part of it does it see as speed?
[Choi Jinyoung]
That's right. Since the cases of former President Roh Moo Hyun and former President Park Geun Hye and President Yoon Suk Yeol are quite different, isn't it a substantive justice to do the same thing and different things? As you know, in the case of the Constitutional Court, the criminal procedure law is applied mutatis mutandis to the impeachment process. The Constitutional Court is responsible for realizing both of these ideologies, which are important to discover substantive truths, but also to ensure due process.
That's why it's important to hold a hearing to discover the real truth.E is the guarantee of due process, and in a way, the guarantee of the defendant's right to defend is a fundamental authority and right guaranteed by the Constitution. It's a constitutional right. Because the president is also a citizen. That's why they're doing it twice a week under the so-called intensive hearing system, and I'd like to ask this lawyer, can he follow the criminal case if he catches it twice or three times a week?
In practice, if you do it twice or three times a week with such an intensive hearing, it's actually very difficult for a lawyer to keep up with it. So, even in the case of former President Park Geun Hye, there was a case where he didn't just give up on such an overly fast criminal trial later, and even lawyers resigned, and eventually appointed a public defender to proceed with the criminal trial. Repeating that again is not something that can happen in a liberal democratic rule of law. In the end, if you try to guarantee the right to defend yourself, you will actually have the opportunity to prepare one by one through lawyers, and as a result, if it is impeachment, you will have to impeach it to justify any constitutional court decision. If you let the Constitutional Court just go KTX-class in this way, and if you set up a criminal case against Representative Lee Jae-myung twice a week, would the Democratic Party accept that?
Rather, I want to tell you that the impeachment process against a president, which is much more important than a criminal case, requires much more emphasis on guaranteeing this right to defend and guaranteeing due process.
[Anchor]
Didn't the impeachment trial hold about twice a week during former President Park Geun Hye? I think it was fast then too. This time, the opinion is that the speed should be adjusted to guarantee some defense rights, what do you think?
[Lee Seung Hoon]
But the KTX ticket was bought by President Yoon Suk Yeol. If you hang up and you get on KTX, you have no choice but to go fast. Why do I have to go fast? The president is the most powerful man. The president is in charge of diplomacy, defense, security, and economy, so how many months can he be suspended from his job? Acting President Choi Sang-mok is not an elected power. Is it right to let unelected powers continue to play their role as presidents? It's not, is it? And the president of Yoon Suk Yeol called his martial law justifiable, and he's not trying to make life for the people impoverished, but he's calling it a warning to the opposition.
It's called constitutional, legal, but why on earth are you afraid of a constitutional trial? I think his words were contradictory. If you say you are so justified, it would be right to go to the constitutional trial quickly rather than imprisoning yourself.
[Anchor]
In the process of being investigated, the Constitutional Court judge said that Park Jong-joon, former head of the Security Service, and Kwon Young-se, chairman of the People's Power Emergency Committee, needed an investigation that fits with national dignity and dignity. So, what if it's an investigation that fits the national dignity and dignity unless it's currently in the execution of a warrant or an impeachment trial?
[Choi Jinyoung]
That's right. It's about investigating according to principle. What are the constitutional principles? The presumption of innocence and the principle of non-confinement trial are investigations that fit the national character. As you know, in the Constitution, even proportional representative lawmakers have immunity and immunity from arrest under the Constitution, just because they are members of the National Assembly. However, in the case of the president, who is not simply a representative of the region, but a head of state representing the entire nation, the privilege of not prosecuting that part, and the fact that there is no such thing is that the president is in this way a rebellion, and even though there is a clear legal dispute now, it is absurd that arrest is a value. Arresting is just a means, not an end, to investigate and to reveal the actual truth through trial.
However, since the first arrest warrant cannot be issued because it seems that the arrest is an innocent value, the second arrest warrant is issued, and the Democratic Party executes the Senior Civil Servant Corruption Investigations Unit to President Yoon Suk Yeol as if he were the head of the police and Senior Civil Servant Corruption Investigations Unit. In the case of lawmaker Lee Sang-sik, who is actually a former police officer, how can he talk about the political neutrality and independence of the police and the Senior Civil Servant Corruption Investigations Unit in this ridiculous situation where his mobile phone caught fire for acting as a messenger with the police before the execution that day?
Isn't that what makes you less qualified? Then you have to go back to principle. If the Democratic Party of Korea gave the police the right to investigate the civil war through the prosecution and investigation, and if the president does not respond despite the police summoning, it is a national qualification and that is the execution of the warrant according to the law by requesting a warrant from the Seoul Central District Court. And as I said, the principle is to investigate without detention.
And even though the president says he will go out for investigation and trial if he does so according to the investigation, it is a reversal of purpose and means for the execution of arrest warrants, which is why many people are now protesting against the Democratic Party's pressure for one-way investigation.
[Anchor]
So, it means that the subject of the investigation is wrong in the end, as well as the process of refuting the request for attendance three times and the process of executing the arrest warrant.
[Lee Seung Hoon]
If the subject of the investigation is wrong, it is common to argue there after being investigated. It's a principle. All people do that. If the court's warrant is issued incorrectly, you can investigate and ask the warrant judge to do so. But the prosecution can't get the person who needs to be investigated. I can't get it from the airlift. I'll get it from the police again. By the way, will you come out if the police summon you? I've been lying all this time. Of course, it won't come out. So what do you want me to ask for? Now come to the official residence. I don't think so.
Kim Gun-hee's investigation was also received at a third place, and if he said he would receive my investigation at his official residence, the prosecution should go and leave his cell phone to investigate. So you don't want to be prosecuted without detention after all? He has not been arrested and continues to work hard on the Constitutional Court, and he will try to prevent impeachment by doing so. Most constitutional scholars believe that he will be impeached. If so, the national instability of the people should be resolved quickly, but it is not, and the lives of the people are ruined because the president continues to drag on.
Now, the exchange rate of companies is rising and they are suffering a tremendous blow to imports, and if this continues, it will go bankrupt. Why is the president destroying the lives of the people, the lives of businessmen, to keep the presidency for two or three more months? You can't compensate me for the damage. This is serious. That's why the execution of arrest warrants should be done quickly and show that the public authority is severe.
[Anchor]
In addition, President Yoon has been suspended from his duties, and he will receive about 260 million won in annual salary this year. There's a story like this. However, in this regard, it is said that it falls under the regulations of the Public Officials Act, which has increased by 3% compared to last year, and the Democratic Party has also issued laws and bills related to it. How do you look at this?
[Choi Jin-nyeong]
There was impeachment of former President Park Roh Moo Hyun, and there is also former President Park Park Geun Hye. There is nothing that the Democratic Party of Korea can't do with the law, right? I'd like to talk about why you don't do it in the past, but now you can do everything except for the revision of the constitution. I also don't intend to defend someone who has been suspended from his job. You just have to follow the law. Of course, that's why the Democratic Party of Korea has proposed a law that cuts salaries in a way when people and public officials who have been impeached are suspended from their duties. Many people will sympathize with that.
Many people, regardless of ruling and opposition parties, criticized former Minister Cho Kuk when he received his full salary even though he was a professor at Seoul National University and was handed over to trial and virtually left. Then, legal maintenance should have been done on this part at the time, but since the president is being impeached in this way, I think it is political instigation to talk about it as if the president is a dirty player. Personally, I agree to some extent that legal action is taken in this regard when impeached.
However, this time, 29 people will be impeached, what will the Constitutional Court do? Regarding the impeachment of the prosecutor who investigated and prosecuted some of the past representatives Lee Jae-myung, they said what the reason for the impeachment was. When the Democratic Party unfairly impeaches as if it were threatening to do this and even impeach the person who investigates and judges themselves, who compensates for the salary cut? Therefore, I believe that if impeachment is reversed, and all of them are dismissed or dismissed, it should be fair to hold the person responsible for the impeachment motion and to hold the person responsible for the unjust impeachment as well as the impeachment responsibility for those who have been impeached.
[Anchor]
However, the Democratic Party of Korea has proposed a revision to the National Public Officials Act to reduce the remuneration of civil servants who have been impeached, but in this regard, it means that the person who makes the impeachment unfair should be held accountable to some extent.
[Lee Seung Hoon]
Then it's the same as saying that the Constitution should get rid of the impeachment trial. What do you stop me from impeaching me because it's illegal or unfair? Then, if the prosecutors are indicted, but they are innocent, should all the prosecutors be punished? That way, the national function is difficult. And in the past, he was prosecuted for impeachment, but he received all the money, and he received a salary. So even now, I think that something like this is ultimately preventing the progress of history. I don't think it's a problem at all because if the impeachment is prosecuted and the job is suspended, the salary will be reduced, and then if the impeachment is dismissed, the reduced salary will be returned.
Let's take a look at the prosecution. After the president of Yoon Suk Yeol came in, the prosecution was almost dictated. So I investigated the opposition leader for two and a half years. Then, you used the prosecution power to use the prosecutors who live on the people's taxes to kill opposition political opponents for two and a half years. This is very unfair. So we have to punish this? Then, the investigation period and investigation into the leader of the opposition party and anyone should be blocked for one year.
You can't use it according to the law, even though it's unfair. In that respect, the constitution of the rule of law should be operated according to the basis of basic common sense and fairness, but if it is stipulated by law, there are more irrational elements.
[Choi Jinyoung]
I'll tell you that. If the prosecutor is not guilty after prosecuting earlier, will he have to be criminally punished? Although there is no criminal punishment, the prosecutor and the prosecutor prosecuted by the investigative prosecutor are subject to severe disciplinary action. Didn't you say that it was a crime of rebellion and that nearly 80% of the impeachment was called rebellion when you said it was a rebellion to the Constitutional Court, but now you are withdrawing the rebellion? But if the prosecutor is guilty of murder. In fact, civil war is a murder against the state, so the crime of murder and the court sentence are the same.
After handing over the accused to trial for murder, if he/she withdraws the fact of the murder and continues to be prosecuted for assault and is convicted, he/she will be prosecuted and virtually undressed. That's the rule of law. It's not a punishment, it's an administrative sanction, but I didn't even say criminal punishment. I want to talk about the spirit of the law that Montesquieu was talking about and that's the definition of the law, so that you don't abuse that power only when you check and balance it.
[Lee Seung Hoon]
I've never heard of a case where a prosecutor is disciplined just because he is innocent. If you fabricate evidence, you can be punished, but for example, I charged you with murder, but there is no causal relationship. So, I would like to say that the prosecutor will not be disciplined for changing the crime of murder to assault or assault in court trials.
[Anchor]
In this regard, controversy over censorship of SNS and Kakao Talk is hot in the political world, so if a lawmaker of the private jet writes or spreads fake news related to propaganda of civil war through KakaoTalk, he said, "I will file a complaint for propaganda of civil war," but I think we should interpret it legally. The part that spreads fake news through KakaoTalk and the part that I will file a complaint against for propaganda of civil war. How can this be legally applicable?
[Choi Jin-nyeong]
The Democratic Party's version. Aren't you going to cover up the people's mouths? Not long ago, the Democratic Party said it would file a criminal complaint against the pollster after some pollsters said that the approval rating for President Yoon Suk Yeol had exceeded 40%. Since then, Korea's leading pollster has changed its opinion that the overall public opinion trend, in short, the approval rating for the people's power, has risen as before, and the public opinion against President Yoon or his approval rating against President Yoon has risen to a significant extent, so I do not file a complaint against it but raise an objection to it.
The fact that this is public opinion may change the trend, and the results of the Constitutional Court have not yet been released and the Supreme Court ruling has not been made as to whether or not the crime of rebellion is established. However, he said, "It's a civil war," said definitively, "I'm a red-handed criminal," and now goes beyond impeaching Yoon Suk Yeol's president, and impeaches acting Prime Minister Han Duck-soo. Now, even the acting president Choi Sang-mok is threatening to impeach him, and I don't even want to say that I am a lawmaker. What does the Constitution say? It is said that the people have the freedom to publish the press and organize the assembly.
The Democratic Party of Korea does not even make a group chat room in KakaoTalk, which many people are talking about, and they do not know what they are talking about in the Telegram chat room, where Russia is the main agent, and through that, they should investigate the part where they confessed to having an affair with the police through seizure and search. It is impossible for the general public to effectively threaten the people in broad daylight, saying that they can now be punished for inciting rebellion by exchanging sound public opinion. In addition, about 10 conservative YouTubers have been sued for inciting rebellion, but as you know, martial law has already been lifted for a month.
Most of the lawyers say that even though it has already happened, there is a possibility that it may become innocent by punishing crimes that do not exist in themselves to instigate propaganda against the war now. I can say almost definitively that the Democratic Party of Korea is trying to cover the people's mouths by talking about the assembly association of press publishing and freedom of expression as the value of Jisun.
[Anchor]
Attorney Choi said it with great enthusiasm, but this seems to be the ruling party's response. You're saying it's martial law on social media or censorship of Kakaotalk. What's the Democratic Party's position?
[Lee Seung Hoon]
The Democratic Party has to show that it is different from the power of the people. The symbol of the president was covering his mouth. You covered your mouth and grabbed your limbs and pulled them out at the KAIST degree ceremony. The Democratic Party needs to be more cautious because it has to show that it is different from this. But in my imagination, the people think that the civil war is not over yet. On YouTube, President Yoon Suk Yeol's declaration of martial law was justified, this is not a civil war, nothing wrong. The opposition party continues to disseminate such propaganda, saying it is tax-free.
As a result, how anxious are the people and false facts are being circulated? It's a warning statement about this, but I'd like to say that the Democratic Party of Korea should expand its freedom of expression because it has to show that it is a different party from the power of the people. President Yoon Suk Yeol just said that lawyer Choi Jin-nyeong's freedom of press publishing and assembly association is very important. This is really important. Nevertheless, the president's declaration of martial law restricted the freedom of press gatherings and associations. I wrote everything in the decree as if I could restrict and censor it like this without a warrant. Why are you preventing such an investigation into the president, and why are you preventing 40 lawmakers from investigating in front of the presidential residence? Are you stopping me from arresting you? I'm telling you that you're showing a very contradictory and abnormal behavior right now.
[Anchor]
These remarks were made by lawmaker Jeon Yong-ki when he accused some YouTubers of propaganda of rebellion. Can YouTubers who actually accused be punished for propaganda of civil war, legally?
[Lee Seung Hoon]
Punishment is not easy. Because as lawyer Choi Jin-nyeong said earlier, the president accepted the National Assembly's request to lift martial law. That's why the civil war ended there, and that's more of the majority in law. However, since the president is still trying to fortify his residence and give his bodyguards guns to prevent legitimate arrest warrants, he will eventually neutralize the state functions of the prosecution or the Senior Civil Servant Corruption Investigations Unit. It's like I won't comply with legal procedures. In fact, the psychological civil war continues today, and the president's lawyers call it a civil war. It's not even Africa right now, but Korea is in a psychological civil war.
[Anchor]
In the midst of this, former lawmaker Kim Min-jeon, the so-called Baekgoldan, was criticized when the National Assembly arranged a press conference for a youth group. What do you think?
[Choi Jinyoung]
That's right. Former lawmaker Kim Min has already apologized for that, given that he did not know it properly. So in that regard, especially when I was in college, I fully understand things like the white bone. At that time, there was criticism that the police were not the cane of the people, but the club of the people, and wasn't it the combat police group called the Baekgoldan that had representative symbolism? It disappeared when it was democratized, but the purpose of saying that now is to tell you the purpose, but as I said, the exception to the law, in a way, in a situation where investigations are conducted through expediency and warrants are issued through expediency, in a way, the people exercise their constitutional resistance to such things, and in the process of performing with such people, Kim Min-jeon apologized right away in this regard, unlike the Democratic Party of Korea.
And for that part, the party also accepted that part and decided not to take issue with it anymore, and this is what should be prevented from happening again. However, in the case of the Democratic Party, as I said, there is clearly such a voice within the Democratic Party. What does this mean when you say this can be an armed conflict and bloodshed? Even now, even if it's too late, it's fair to say that it's right for the police and the National Police Agency to investigate according to the inspection and completion of the investigation, saying that it's right to go back and protect the legal level of the Republic of Korea.
That's why, in a big framework, I think President Yoon Suk Yeol should be held accountable if I don't follow the constitutional procedures, instead of picking a finger at these parts. Taking that responsibility is to follow the legal process. If the legal process is not followed properly in the future, as the Democratic Party says now, if there is a corruption crime of the Democratic Party of Korea or something, and if there is a search and seizure warrant against the Democratic Party of Korea, if there is a refusal in front of it, introduce the same police commando now, mobilize armored vehicles. And mobilize the helicopter. There's a story like this. That's why the busier and more controversial you are, the more you follow the procedures set out in the Constitution and Law, which are the basis of democracy and the rule of law. I have no choice but to reiterate the principle that only then can there be acceptance.
[Anchor]
But didn't the 6th party submit a request for the expulsion of former lawmaker Kim Min?
How do you think we should respond to the power of the people, to what extent?
[Lee Seung Hoon]
In fact, we have to discipline the people from their power. Please discipline yourself and prevent expulsion. He apologized for not expelling him because he should say he did something wrong. You just have to make a mistake and apologize. The president is also being investigated for rebellion, and if he says he did something wrong, does he not have to punish him? Is that a law or a public authority? The power of the people now is the Conservative Party. President Yoon Suk Yeol appointed the chief justice, the prosecutor general, the police chief, and the head of the Airborne Division. What the hell is the Conservative Party worth? Why do you applaud the president for saying he won't be investigated by the people he appointed and won't be tried?
If you do that, it becomes an unconstitutional party. In the past, former President Park Geun Hye tried to dissolve an unconstitutional political party, and the Progressive Party was the United Progressive Party? You blew it as an unconstitutional party. The power of the Conservative Party and the people is now an unconstitutional party. They don't obey the law. I think this can't happen. Rather, the Democratic Party of Korea should stay calm and follow the rules.Ma says that the power of the people should be refrained from violating and ignoring the Constitution and legal values for the benefit of their own political parties or for the benefit of individual lawmakers.
[Anchor]
In addition, Deputy Chief Kim Sung-hoon, who served as acting head of the security department. It is the third time that they have refused to comply with the police's request for attendance, and some are classified as so-called hardliners, so there will be even more conflict in future enforcement attempts. There are also observations like this, what do you think about this?
[Choi Jin-nyeong]
In the end, the current Democratic Party of Korea said, "We don't have the right to investigate because we want to file a complaint with the prosecution regarding the crime of rebellion," and to the Senior Civil Servant Corruption Investigations Unit, we don't have any crime of rebellion. Bribery or something like that. In the end, the Democratic Party of Korea completely blurred the judicial system of the Republic of Korea through the inspection and completion of the investigation, making it impossible to know where the investigation right is. In the end, in the case of the current situation, if the law is followed, it is correct to be under the National Investigation Headquarters and the police. If so, it should be done as it is, but it is not, and in the case of the Senior Civil Servant Corruption Investigations Unit, it is clearly stated that the primary investigation and jurisdiction are in the Seoul Central District Court.
However, by using it as an expedient, he went to the Western District Court and got a warrant, and in the process, it is being raised as a suspicion.Isn't there a suspicion that Ma requested a warrant from the Central District Court at the Senior Civil Servant Corruption Investigations Unit, but the warrant was rejected, so he hid it and requested a warrant from the Western District Court? In the end, if the jurisdiction is wrong and the investigation procedure is wrong, the warrant itself is invalid.
. Therefore, even if we prevent the wrong execution of public affairs, it is not a legitimate execution of public affairs, so the obstruction of public affairs is not established. Furthermore, his duties were suspended due to impeachment anyway. However, in the case of the presidential security agency, since he is the current president, he is faithful to his duty that security for the president needs to maintain the well-being of his body and housing anyway. Therefore, whether it is justified or not will ultimately be decided by the Supreme Court and the Constitutional Court later, and in the process, there is such a situation that they are fulfilling their duties, so this happens.
That's why I think we need a spirit of agreement and compromise between the ruling and opposition parties in this situation. As you said, at times like this, there is a great need to return to the principle of non-restraint investigation, the presumption of innocence, and the principle that the Democratic Party of Korea talked about as the value of the earth and earth. If you don't, wouldn't anyone be able to predict what will happen in Korea next week? In the end, if you say you'll do your job, wouldn't you say you'll take responsibility for it? However, various mishaps that can occur in the process. What did the Democrats say?
Go in, open your chest, point your gun at me and shoot me, and I'll come out with a coffin. an act of abetting and abetting such ridiculous bloodshed. Isn't this not supposed to happen? That's why go back to constitutional principles. I told you that if you follow the presumption of innocence and the principle of investigation without detention, there will be no such problem.
[Anchor]
It means that the jurisdiction, procedures, and appropriateness of the investigative agency are all wrong, but Park Jong-joon, the former head of the security agency, said that there is a legal debate while completing the second investigation. In the end, the security service and the presidential office are likely to prevent the execution of the second arrest warrant by saying that the jurisdiction, procedures, and appropriateness of the investigative agency are wrong, right?
[Lee Seung Hoon]
The same goes for the security chief. If you thought your argument was correct and legally correct, would you have been investigated by the police? He won't answer it. They're continuing to block the president's arrest. However, he resigned and was investigated by the police, and the police are my family. You're asking me to save you. He knows if it's illegal. However, he is making such hypocritical remarks, but in the end, he comes out to the police investigation and talks like that even though he knows his actions are wrong. In the end, there is a very hypocritical situation, and I say that the president looks so lame and pathetic. There is a plaque on the president's desk that says, "All responsibilities are mine." What are you responsible for now? It's all
, and we're just passing all the employees down there on responsibility. Are their pensions, their civil service, their families themselves responsible? I don't understand why you're destroying other people's lives when you're a very likely person to be arrested anyway and you can't even take responsibility. The Minister of Defense has been arrested. And then the counterintelligence commander was arrested. The commander of the water defense has been arrested. Special Forces commander arrested. The police chief has been arrested. The head of the Seoul Metropolitan Government has been arrested. All of the high-ranking positions that he appointed because he wanted to rebel are arrested. But why are you hiding comfortably in your official residence? If you take responsibility and say that martial law is justifiable, it is right to say that our men did nothing wrong and that it is my responsibility.
[Anchor]
However, Park Jong-joon and the head of the Security Support Division, who are classified as relatively moderate in the command of the Security Service, attended the police. Hard-liners are now refusing to attend, but in the end, there will be a crack in the bodyguard's single battalion and the arrest warrant will be at a disadvantage. What do you think about this?
[Choi Jin-nyeong]
In the end, I think it's a tragedy to approach that way, as I said. As I said, we need to look at this issue in a bigger frame. In fact, as in this case, the president of Yoon Suk Yeol was chosen through direct voting by the entire nation. And as you know, the president's declaration of emergency martial law is basically an act of governance. That's why the judiciary refrains from governing when it comes to basic traditional constitutional law, and that's why even in the United States, the court has not properly judged the allegations of civil war against President Trump. It's also true that I was angry at the beginning with a lot of the bad memories of the emergency martial law and the memories of losing all the weekends.
However, if you look at the current situation through what President Yoon wanted to do, don't many people sympathize with the criticism that the Democratic Party of Korea defines the right wing of freedom, including President Yoon Suk Yeol, as a group of incitement to rebellion and completely exterminate the right wing of freedom? That's why I'm not saying let's protect President Yoon. I'm talking about the constitutional principle that the actual truth told in the Constitution should be observed in accordance with due process, and furthermore, I'm talking about the situation of protecting the basic liberal democratic order in the full text of the Constitution.
Perhaps that's why the liberal rightists, who were very critical of President Yoon Suk Yeol's emergency martial law in the early days, and even centrist citizens, saw the Democratic Party's seemingly endless impeachment, impeachment, impeachment, and impeachment after impeachment. He talked about the impeachment of Prime Minister Han Deok-soo and even the impeachment of Acting President Choi Sang-mok. Furthermore, the first reason related to the recent impeachment of President Yoon Suk Yeol was that President Yoon placed too much importance on South Korea, the U.S., Japan, and belittled North Korea, China, and Russia as his first reason for impeachment, and that he had a strong policy of checking North Korea when he said that he would conduct a special prosecution against Yoon Suk Yeol. Many people are anxious about using that as a reason for impeachment and special prosecution.
In that sense, I would like to say that the Democratic Party should return to principle in this way because it can cause a backlash against the Democratic Party when it goes to the trend of trying to steal the government rather than trying to protect the people's livelihood and economy.
[Anchor]
Since you mentioned the Special Prosecutor Act, I will briefly talk about the Special Prosecutor Act. Six opposition parties, including the Democratic Party of Korea, have reissued the Insurrection Special Prosecution Act, and let's hear from floor leader Kwon Sung-dong and supreme council member Kim Min-seok about what the ruling and opposition parties have talked about. If you look at the proposals proposed by the six opposition parties, you have excluded the recommendation of a third party, the right to veto, and the parts that the ruling party is protesting against.Ma added the foreign exchange crime, and the ruling party criticized this as the so-called Kim Yo-jong Special Prosecutor Act. What do you think about this?
[Lee Seung-hoon]
[Lee Seung-hoon]
A bill was proposed to punish those who violated the law, and the Kim Yo-jung Special Prosecutor Act itself continues to take actions to create disputes. First of all, it was customary in the past to recommend it by the opposition. So is the special prosecutor Choi Soon-sil and the special prosecutor Druking. Nevertheless, as the ruling party argued, it gave the chief justice the right to recommend. The Chief Justice is appointed by the President of Yoon Suk Yeol. Would he intentionally manipulate against them? I don't think so. In addition, the opposition party had the power to criticize and demand that the person recommended by the Chief Justice of the Supreme Court be recommended again, but this was also eliminated. And the investigation period has been drastically reduced.
The investigation staff has also been drastically reduced. Almost all of them received the ruling party's proposal. The opposition insisted on this. If you send a drone to North Korea and listen to former commander Roh Sang-won's story now, it's been revealed one after another that he tried to do martial law against North Korea by provoking it, so he added a foreign exchange crime. Nevertheless, if the opposition party is really willing to talk, I think this is also a part that can be withdrawn. It's the part that can be agreed upon. That's why you have to talk. You can't because you did this and that. You can't because you did that. And if you can't do this or that, you end up saying you don't want to do an independent counsel, and the president says he won't be investigated by the police. Can't you see it? That's why we need to show the seriousness of the public authority, and I would like to say that the execution of an arrest warrant against President Yoon Suk Yeol must be successful to the Senior Civil Servant Corruption Investigations Unit this time.
[Anchor]
The People's Power of the Insurrection Special Counsel Act said they would discuss their own initiative.The Democratic Party and the six opposition parties plan to vote at the plenary session on the 14th. What will be the departure ticket this time?
[Choi Jin-nyeong]
In fact, in the last case, it was rejected very narrowly by two votes, but from the current trend, I don't think there is a possibility that it will pass. Nevertheless, the current Civil War Special Prosecutor Act is nothing more than a change in the name of the floor leader of the People's Power Party. It is true that the fact that the special prosecutor was the chief justice of the Supreme Court has actually improved to some extent, although he said he would leave the kernel as it is and just go to the shell. However, the scope of the rebellion investigation is more than both the police and the prosecution combined.
In the end, when you look at the contents, you talk as if the president has attracted foreign exchange, but now the Democratic Party of Korea sees North Korea as a foreign country? Foreign exchange is, for example, attracting foreign countries to war. According to Article 4 of the Constitution of the Republic of Korea, North Korea is a territory of the Republic of Korea because it is an annexed island to the Korean Peninsula, and it is only an unclaimed area, and it is legally impossible for something that has been done as a military policy to be foreign exchange.
By the way, they call it a foreign exchange crime that cannot be legally done, and leave that part to the special prosecutor, not the prosecution, to investigate? This is what pro-North Korea, pro-North Korea, pro-North Korea, pro-Russian, and that's why many people are questioning whether the Democratic Party is in the right direction to go in this situation. Therefore, in this regard, I also have a question of whether it is right for the police to investigate, not the prosecution. Then, I think one way is to conduct a special prosecution as a third alternative. However, I think the Democratic Party leadership should know that if it is to clarify the subject of the special prosecutor's appointment, the scope of the investigation related to the special prosecutor, and to stabilize this part within a short period of time.
[Anchor]
I see. I'll stop listening to it. So far, I've been with lawyer Choi Jin-nyeong and lawyer Lee Seung-hoon. Thank you.
※ 'Your report becomes news'
[Kakao Talk] YTN Search and Add Channel
[Phone] 02-398-8585
[Mail] social@ytn. co. kr
[Copyright holder (c) YTN Unauthorized reproduction, redistribution and use of AI data prohibited]
■ Starring: Attorney Lee Seung-hoon, Lawyer Choi Jin-nyeong
* 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]
President Yoon expressed his intention not to attend the Constitutional Court's first formal hearing scheduled for the 14th. I was concerned about my personal safety, but I will take a closer look at the contents related to lawyer Choi Jin-nyeong and lawyer Lee Seung-hoon. President Yoon decided not to attend the first hearing on the 14th. You said you were concerned about your safety, what kind of concern are you?
[Choi Jinyoung]
That's right. In the case of President Yoon Suk Yeol, he said he would attend when the Constitutional Court begins its argument. However, as a prerequisite, the condition of securing personal safety was added. In the end, as things stand, the Senior Civil Servant Corruption Investigations Unit has issued an arrest warrant for the so-called President of Yoon Suk Yeol, and it has not been confirmed on January 14th.Ma seems to have decided that it is the period of execution of the warrant issued by the court. In the end, I think he talked about the potential risk that the arrest can be carried out in the process of leaving his residence, going to the Constitutional Court, pleading, and returning to the Constitutional Court, in the case of President Yoon Suk Yeol's lawyer, there may be a risk to his personal safety.
On top of that, the first thing he said was the president's personal safety department.In the second round, I think it was a comprehensive review of social unrest caused by armed conflict or conflicts between public authorities. In the end, overall, he said he'll continue to attend.E predicts that the time of attendance is likely to be after the end of the arrest warrant period.
[Anchor]
But when the security problem is solved, I said I would go, but then the security problem, aren't there quite a few members in the security service now? Do you think these parts should be added?
[Lee Seung Hoon]
There is a security problem because he is actually suspended from his job and needs an arrest warrant, but he won't go as an excuse for security? This doesn't make sense. Security is security from terrorism, threats, and anxiety, but the court's warrant is not an element of anxiety or illegality. In that respect, you don't need security, but you have to voluntarily walk into the investigative agency, but you don't walk in and fortify your official residence, and to put it in a good way, it's fortifying but actually creating a prison. You build your own prison and the guards there are not monitoring the president of Yoon Suk Yeol, but rather using security agents who protect you. This is true for the president to destroy national dignity, but it also degrades the dignity of the bodyguards. You didn't have a bodyguard to prevent the president from attending the court. It's not a soldier. In that respect, I think it would be nice if the president acted with dignity and at the end with dignity.
[Anchor]
However, President Yoon's side claims that the Constitutional Court's impeachment trial is also fast. What is your opinion on this?
[Lee Seung Hoon]
There was also the former president of Roh Moo Hyun. There was also former President Park Geun Hye, but he was slower than then. At that time, President Roh Moo Hyun had a strong will to protect the constitution, so he took an active role, and former President Park Geun Hye at least knew his faults and gave up active defense. I thought this was to remove the elements of national instability, but now President Yoon Suk Yeol is at the peak of encouraging national instability while still in the position of supreme power. So, how long are you going to make excuses under the Constitutional Court, the police, the prosecution, the Senior Civil Servant Corruption Investigations Unit? I hope the president will keep his words with dignity because he said he would accept it confidently, whether it's an investigation or impeachment.
[Anchor]
The Constitutional Court also expressed its opinion that it is not so fast compared to the precedent, but what part of it does it see as speed?
[Choi Jinyoung]
That's right. Since the cases of former President Roh Moo Hyun and former President Park Geun Hye and President Yoon Suk Yeol are quite different, isn't it a substantive justice to do the same thing and different things? As you know, in the case of the Constitutional Court, the criminal procedure law is applied mutatis mutandis to the impeachment process. The Constitutional Court is responsible for realizing both of these ideologies, which are important to discover substantive truths, but also to ensure due process.
That's why it's important to hold a hearing to discover the real truth.E is the guarantee of due process, and in a way, the guarantee of the defendant's right to defend is a fundamental authority and right guaranteed by the Constitution. It's a constitutional right. Because the president is also a citizen. That's why they're doing it twice a week under the so-called intensive hearing system, and I'd like to ask this lawyer, can he follow the criminal case if he catches it twice or three times a week?
In practice, if you do it twice or three times a week with such an intensive hearing, it's actually very difficult for a lawyer to keep up with it. So, even in the case of former President Park Geun Hye, there was a case where he didn't just give up on such an overly fast criminal trial later, and even lawyers resigned, and eventually appointed a public defender to proceed with the criminal trial. Repeating that again is not something that can happen in a liberal democratic rule of law. In the end, if you try to guarantee the right to defend yourself, you will actually have the opportunity to prepare one by one through lawyers, and as a result, if it is impeachment, you will have to impeach it to justify any constitutional court decision. If you let the Constitutional Court just go KTX-class in this way, and if you set up a criminal case against Representative Lee Jae-myung twice a week, would the Democratic Party accept that?
Rather, I want to tell you that the impeachment process against a president, which is much more important than a criminal case, requires much more emphasis on guaranteeing this right to defend and guaranteeing due process.
[Anchor]
Didn't the impeachment trial hold about twice a week during former President Park Geun Hye? I think it was fast then too. This time, the opinion is that the speed should be adjusted to guarantee some defense rights, what do you think?
[Lee Seung Hoon]
But the KTX ticket was bought by President Yoon Suk Yeol. If you hang up and you get on KTX, you have no choice but to go fast. Why do I have to go fast? The president is the most powerful man. The president is in charge of diplomacy, defense, security, and economy, so how many months can he be suspended from his job? Acting President Choi Sang-mok is not an elected power. Is it right to let unelected powers continue to play their role as presidents? It's not, is it? And the president of Yoon Suk Yeol called his martial law justifiable, and he's not trying to make life for the people impoverished, but he's calling it a warning to the opposition.
It's called constitutional, legal, but why on earth are you afraid of a constitutional trial? I think his words were contradictory. If you say you are so justified, it would be right to go to the constitutional trial quickly rather than imprisoning yourself.
[Anchor]
In the process of being investigated, the Constitutional Court judge said that Park Jong-joon, former head of the Security Service, and Kwon Young-se, chairman of the People's Power Emergency Committee, needed an investigation that fits with national dignity and dignity. So, what if it's an investigation that fits the national dignity and dignity unless it's currently in the execution of a warrant or an impeachment trial?
[Choi Jinyoung]
That's right. It's about investigating according to principle. What are the constitutional principles? The presumption of innocence and the principle of non-confinement trial are investigations that fit the national character. As you know, in the Constitution, even proportional representative lawmakers have immunity and immunity from arrest under the Constitution, just because they are members of the National Assembly. However, in the case of the president, who is not simply a representative of the region, but a head of state representing the entire nation, the privilege of not prosecuting that part, and the fact that there is no such thing is that the president is in this way a rebellion, and even though there is a clear legal dispute now, it is absurd that arrest is a value. Arresting is just a means, not an end, to investigate and to reveal the actual truth through trial.
However, since the first arrest warrant cannot be issued because it seems that the arrest is an innocent value, the second arrest warrant is issued, and the Democratic Party executes the Senior Civil Servant Corruption Investigations Unit to President Yoon Suk Yeol as if he were the head of the police and Senior Civil Servant Corruption Investigations Unit. In the case of lawmaker Lee Sang-sik, who is actually a former police officer, how can he talk about the political neutrality and independence of the police and the Senior Civil Servant Corruption Investigations Unit in this ridiculous situation where his mobile phone caught fire for acting as a messenger with the police before the execution that day?
Isn't that what makes you less qualified? Then you have to go back to principle. If the Democratic Party of Korea gave the police the right to investigate the civil war through the prosecution and investigation, and if the president does not respond despite the police summoning, it is a national qualification and that is the execution of the warrant according to the law by requesting a warrant from the Seoul Central District Court. And as I said, the principle is to investigate without detention.
And even though the president says he will go out for investigation and trial if he does so according to the investigation, it is a reversal of purpose and means for the execution of arrest warrants, which is why many people are now protesting against the Democratic Party's pressure for one-way investigation.
[Anchor]
So, it means that the subject of the investigation is wrong in the end, as well as the process of refuting the request for attendance three times and the process of executing the arrest warrant.
[Lee Seung Hoon]
If the subject of the investigation is wrong, it is common to argue there after being investigated. It's a principle. All people do that. If the court's warrant is issued incorrectly, you can investigate and ask the warrant judge to do so. But the prosecution can't get the person who needs to be investigated. I can't get it from the airlift. I'll get it from the police again. By the way, will you come out if the police summon you? I've been lying all this time. Of course, it won't come out. So what do you want me to ask for? Now come to the official residence. I don't think so.
Kim Gun-hee's investigation was also received at a third place, and if he said he would receive my investigation at his official residence, the prosecution should go and leave his cell phone to investigate. So you don't want to be prosecuted without detention after all? He has not been arrested and continues to work hard on the Constitutional Court, and he will try to prevent impeachment by doing so. Most constitutional scholars believe that he will be impeached. If so, the national instability of the people should be resolved quickly, but it is not, and the lives of the people are ruined because the president continues to drag on.
Now, the exchange rate of companies is rising and they are suffering a tremendous blow to imports, and if this continues, it will go bankrupt. Why is the president destroying the lives of the people, the lives of businessmen, to keep the presidency for two or three more months? You can't compensate me for the damage. This is serious. That's why the execution of arrest warrants should be done quickly and show that the public authority is severe.
[Anchor]
In addition, President Yoon has been suspended from his duties, and he will receive about 260 million won in annual salary this year. There's a story like this. However, in this regard, it is said that it falls under the regulations of the Public Officials Act, which has increased by 3% compared to last year, and the Democratic Party has also issued laws and bills related to it. How do you look at this?
[Choi Jin-nyeong]
There was impeachment of former President Park Roh Moo Hyun, and there is also former President Park Park Geun Hye. There is nothing that the Democratic Party of Korea can't do with the law, right? I'd like to talk about why you don't do it in the past, but now you can do everything except for the revision of the constitution. I also don't intend to defend someone who has been suspended from his job. You just have to follow the law. Of course, that's why the Democratic Party of Korea has proposed a law that cuts salaries in a way when people and public officials who have been impeached are suspended from their duties. Many people will sympathize with that.
Many people, regardless of ruling and opposition parties, criticized former Minister Cho Kuk when he received his full salary even though he was a professor at Seoul National University and was handed over to trial and virtually left. Then, legal maintenance should have been done on this part at the time, but since the president is being impeached in this way, I think it is political instigation to talk about it as if the president is a dirty player. Personally, I agree to some extent that legal action is taken in this regard when impeached.
However, this time, 29 people will be impeached, what will the Constitutional Court do? Regarding the impeachment of the prosecutor who investigated and prosecuted some of the past representatives Lee Jae-myung, they said what the reason for the impeachment was. When the Democratic Party unfairly impeaches as if it were threatening to do this and even impeach the person who investigates and judges themselves, who compensates for the salary cut? Therefore, I believe that if impeachment is reversed, and all of them are dismissed or dismissed, it should be fair to hold the person responsible for the impeachment motion and to hold the person responsible for the unjust impeachment as well as the impeachment responsibility for those who have been impeached.
[Anchor]
However, the Democratic Party of Korea has proposed a revision to the National Public Officials Act to reduce the remuneration of civil servants who have been impeached, but in this regard, it means that the person who makes the impeachment unfair should be held accountable to some extent.
[Lee Seung Hoon]
Then it's the same as saying that the Constitution should get rid of the impeachment trial. What do you stop me from impeaching me because it's illegal or unfair? Then, if the prosecutors are indicted, but they are innocent, should all the prosecutors be punished? That way, the national function is difficult. And in the past, he was prosecuted for impeachment, but he received all the money, and he received a salary. So even now, I think that something like this is ultimately preventing the progress of history. I don't think it's a problem at all because if the impeachment is prosecuted and the job is suspended, the salary will be reduced, and then if the impeachment is dismissed, the reduced salary will be returned.
Let's take a look at the prosecution. After the president of Yoon Suk Yeol came in, the prosecution was almost dictated. So I investigated the opposition leader for two and a half years. Then, you used the prosecution power to use the prosecutors who live on the people's taxes to kill opposition political opponents for two and a half years. This is very unfair. So we have to punish this? Then, the investigation period and investigation into the leader of the opposition party and anyone should be blocked for one year.
You can't use it according to the law, even though it's unfair. In that respect, the constitution of the rule of law should be operated according to the basis of basic common sense and fairness, but if it is stipulated by law, there are more irrational elements.
[Choi Jinyoung]
I'll tell you that. If the prosecutor is not guilty after prosecuting earlier, will he have to be criminally punished? Although there is no criminal punishment, the prosecutor and the prosecutor prosecuted by the investigative prosecutor are subject to severe disciplinary action. Didn't you say that it was a crime of rebellion and that nearly 80% of the impeachment was called rebellion when you said it was a rebellion to the Constitutional Court, but now you are withdrawing the rebellion? But if the prosecutor is guilty of murder. In fact, civil war is a murder against the state, so the crime of murder and the court sentence are the same.
After handing over the accused to trial for murder, if he/she withdraws the fact of the murder and continues to be prosecuted for assault and is convicted, he/she will be prosecuted and virtually undressed. That's the rule of law. It's not a punishment, it's an administrative sanction, but I didn't even say criminal punishment. I want to talk about the spirit of the law that Montesquieu was talking about and that's the definition of the law, so that you don't abuse that power only when you check and balance it.
[Lee Seung Hoon]
I've never heard of a case where a prosecutor is disciplined just because he is innocent. If you fabricate evidence, you can be punished, but for example, I charged you with murder, but there is no causal relationship. So, I would like to say that the prosecutor will not be disciplined for changing the crime of murder to assault or assault in court trials.
[Anchor]
In this regard, controversy over censorship of SNS and Kakao Talk is hot in the political world, so if a lawmaker of the private jet writes or spreads fake news related to propaganda of civil war through KakaoTalk, he said, "I will file a complaint for propaganda of civil war," but I think we should interpret it legally. The part that spreads fake news through KakaoTalk and the part that I will file a complaint against for propaganda of civil war. How can this be legally applicable?
[Choi Jin-nyeong]
The Democratic Party's version. Aren't you going to cover up the people's mouths? Not long ago, the Democratic Party said it would file a criminal complaint against the pollster after some pollsters said that the approval rating for President Yoon Suk Yeol had exceeded 40%. Since then, Korea's leading pollster has changed its opinion that the overall public opinion trend, in short, the approval rating for the people's power, has risen as before, and the public opinion against President Yoon or his approval rating against President Yoon has risen to a significant extent, so I do not file a complaint against it but raise an objection to it.
The fact that this is public opinion may change the trend, and the results of the Constitutional Court have not yet been released and the Supreme Court ruling has not been made as to whether or not the crime of rebellion is established. However, he said, "It's a civil war," said definitively, "I'm a red-handed criminal," and now goes beyond impeaching Yoon Suk Yeol's president, and impeaches acting Prime Minister Han Duck-soo. Now, even the acting president Choi Sang-mok is threatening to impeach him, and I don't even want to say that I am a lawmaker. What does the Constitution say? It is said that the people have the freedom to publish the press and organize the assembly.
The Democratic Party of Korea does not even make a group chat room in KakaoTalk, which many people are talking about, and they do not know what they are talking about in the Telegram chat room, where Russia is the main agent, and through that, they should investigate the part where they confessed to having an affair with the police through seizure and search. It is impossible for the general public to effectively threaten the people in broad daylight, saying that they can now be punished for inciting rebellion by exchanging sound public opinion. In addition, about 10 conservative YouTubers have been sued for inciting rebellion, but as you know, martial law has already been lifted for a month.
Most of the lawyers say that even though it has already happened, there is a possibility that it may become innocent by punishing crimes that do not exist in themselves to instigate propaganda against the war now. I can say almost definitively that the Democratic Party of Korea is trying to cover the people's mouths by talking about the assembly association of press publishing and freedom of expression as the value of Jisun.
[Anchor]
Attorney Choi said it with great enthusiasm, but this seems to be the ruling party's response. You're saying it's martial law on social media or censorship of Kakaotalk. What's the Democratic Party's position?
[Lee Seung Hoon]
The Democratic Party has to show that it is different from the power of the people. The symbol of the president was covering his mouth. You covered your mouth and grabbed your limbs and pulled them out at the KAIST degree ceremony. The Democratic Party needs to be more cautious because it has to show that it is different from this. But in my imagination, the people think that the civil war is not over yet. On YouTube, President Yoon Suk Yeol's declaration of martial law was justified, this is not a civil war, nothing wrong. The opposition party continues to disseminate such propaganda, saying it is tax-free.
As a result, how anxious are the people and false facts are being circulated? It's a warning statement about this, but I'd like to say that the Democratic Party of Korea should expand its freedom of expression because it has to show that it is a different party from the power of the people. President Yoon Suk Yeol just said that lawyer Choi Jin-nyeong's freedom of press publishing and assembly association is very important. This is really important. Nevertheless, the president's declaration of martial law restricted the freedom of press gatherings and associations. I wrote everything in the decree as if I could restrict and censor it like this without a warrant. Why are you preventing such an investigation into the president, and why are you preventing 40 lawmakers from investigating in front of the presidential residence? Are you stopping me from arresting you? I'm telling you that you're showing a very contradictory and abnormal behavior right now.
[Anchor]
These remarks were made by lawmaker Jeon Yong-ki when he accused some YouTubers of propaganda of rebellion. Can YouTubers who actually accused be punished for propaganda of civil war, legally?
[Lee Seung Hoon]
Punishment is not easy. Because as lawyer Choi Jin-nyeong said earlier, the president accepted the National Assembly's request to lift martial law. That's why the civil war ended there, and that's more of the majority in law. However, since the president is still trying to fortify his residence and give his bodyguards guns to prevent legitimate arrest warrants, he will eventually neutralize the state functions of the prosecution or the Senior Civil Servant Corruption Investigations Unit. It's like I won't comply with legal procedures. In fact, the psychological civil war continues today, and the president's lawyers call it a civil war. It's not even Africa right now, but Korea is in a psychological civil war.
[Anchor]
In the midst of this, former lawmaker Kim Min-jeon, the so-called Baekgoldan, was criticized when the National Assembly arranged a press conference for a youth group. What do you think?
[Choi Jinyoung]
That's right. Former lawmaker Kim Min has already apologized for that, given that he did not know it properly. So in that regard, especially when I was in college, I fully understand things like the white bone. At that time, there was criticism that the police were not the cane of the people, but the club of the people, and wasn't it the combat police group called the Baekgoldan that had representative symbolism? It disappeared when it was democratized, but the purpose of saying that now is to tell you the purpose, but as I said, the exception to the law, in a way, in a situation where investigations are conducted through expediency and warrants are issued through expediency, in a way, the people exercise their constitutional resistance to such things, and in the process of performing with such people, Kim Min-jeon apologized right away in this regard, unlike the Democratic Party of Korea.
And for that part, the party also accepted that part and decided not to take issue with it anymore, and this is what should be prevented from happening again. However, in the case of the Democratic Party, as I said, there is clearly such a voice within the Democratic Party. What does this mean when you say this can be an armed conflict and bloodshed? Even now, even if it's too late, it's fair to say that it's right for the police and the National Police Agency to investigate according to the inspection and completion of the investigation, saying that it's right to go back and protect the legal level of the Republic of Korea.
That's why, in a big framework, I think President Yoon Suk Yeol should be held accountable if I don't follow the constitutional procedures, instead of picking a finger at these parts. Taking that responsibility is to follow the legal process. If the legal process is not followed properly in the future, as the Democratic Party says now, if there is a corruption crime of the Democratic Party of Korea or something, and if there is a search and seizure warrant against the Democratic Party of Korea, if there is a refusal in front of it, introduce the same police commando now, mobilize armored vehicles. And mobilize the helicopter. There's a story like this. That's why the busier and more controversial you are, the more you follow the procedures set out in the Constitution and Law, which are the basis of democracy and the rule of law. I have no choice but to reiterate the principle that only then can there be acceptance.
[Anchor]
But didn't the 6th party submit a request for the expulsion of former lawmaker Kim Min?
How do you think we should respond to the power of the people, to what extent?
[Lee Seung Hoon]
In fact, we have to discipline the people from their power. Please discipline yourself and prevent expulsion. He apologized for not expelling him because he should say he did something wrong. You just have to make a mistake and apologize. The president is also being investigated for rebellion, and if he says he did something wrong, does he not have to punish him? Is that a law or a public authority? The power of the people now is the Conservative Party. President Yoon Suk Yeol appointed the chief justice, the prosecutor general, the police chief, and the head of the Airborne Division. What the hell is the Conservative Party worth? Why do you applaud the president for saying he won't be investigated by the people he appointed and won't be tried?
If you do that, it becomes an unconstitutional party. In the past, former President Park Geun Hye tried to dissolve an unconstitutional political party, and the Progressive Party was the United Progressive Party? You blew it as an unconstitutional party. The power of the Conservative Party and the people is now an unconstitutional party. They don't obey the law. I think this can't happen. Rather, the Democratic Party of Korea should stay calm and follow the rules.Ma says that the power of the people should be refrained from violating and ignoring the Constitution and legal values for the benefit of their own political parties or for the benefit of individual lawmakers.
[Anchor]
In addition, Deputy Chief Kim Sung-hoon, who served as acting head of the security department. It is the third time that they have refused to comply with the police's request for attendance, and some are classified as so-called hardliners, so there will be even more conflict in future enforcement attempts. There are also observations like this, what do you think about this?
[Choi Jin-nyeong]
In the end, the current Democratic Party of Korea said, "We don't have the right to investigate because we want to file a complaint with the prosecution regarding the crime of rebellion," and to the Senior Civil Servant Corruption Investigations Unit, we don't have any crime of rebellion. Bribery or something like that. In the end, the Democratic Party of Korea completely blurred the judicial system of the Republic of Korea through the inspection and completion of the investigation, making it impossible to know where the investigation right is. In the end, in the case of the current situation, if the law is followed, it is correct to be under the National Investigation Headquarters and the police. If so, it should be done as it is, but it is not, and in the case of the Senior Civil Servant Corruption Investigations Unit, it is clearly stated that the primary investigation and jurisdiction are in the Seoul Central District Court.
However, by using it as an expedient, he went to the Western District Court and got a warrant, and in the process, it is being raised as a suspicion.Isn't there a suspicion that Ma requested a warrant from the Central District Court at the Senior Civil Servant Corruption Investigations Unit, but the warrant was rejected, so he hid it and requested a warrant from the Western District Court? In the end, if the jurisdiction is wrong and the investigation procedure is wrong, the warrant itself is invalid.
. Therefore, even if we prevent the wrong execution of public affairs, it is not a legitimate execution of public affairs, so the obstruction of public affairs is not established. Furthermore, his duties were suspended due to impeachment anyway. However, in the case of the presidential security agency, since he is the current president, he is faithful to his duty that security for the president needs to maintain the well-being of his body and housing anyway. Therefore, whether it is justified or not will ultimately be decided by the Supreme Court and the Constitutional Court later, and in the process, there is such a situation that they are fulfilling their duties, so this happens.
That's why I think we need a spirit of agreement and compromise between the ruling and opposition parties in this situation. As you said, at times like this, there is a great need to return to the principle of non-restraint investigation, the presumption of innocence, and the principle that the Democratic Party of Korea talked about as the value of the earth and earth. If you don't, wouldn't anyone be able to predict what will happen in Korea next week? In the end, if you say you'll do your job, wouldn't you say you'll take responsibility for it? However, various mishaps that can occur in the process. What did the Democrats say?
Go in, open your chest, point your gun at me and shoot me, and I'll come out with a coffin. an act of abetting and abetting such ridiculous bloodshed. Isn't this not supposed to happen? That's why go back to constitutional principles. I told you that if you follow the presumption of innocence and the principle of investigation without detention, there will be no such problem.
[Anchor]
It means that the jurisdiction, procedures, and appropriateness of the investigative agency are all wrong, but Park Jong-joon, the former head of the security agency, said that there is a legal debate while completing the second investigation. In the end, the security service and the presidential office are likely to prevent the execution of the second arrest warrant by saying that the jurisdiction, procedures, and appropriateness of the investigative agency are wrong, right?
[Lee Seung Hoon]
The same goes for the security chief. If you thought your argument was correct and legally correct, would you have been investigated by the police? He won't answer it. They're continuing to block the president's arrest. However, he resigned and was investigated by the police, and the police are my family. You're asking me to save you. He knows if it's illegal. However, he is making such hypocritical remarks, but in the end, he comes out to the police investigation and talks like that even though he knows his actions are wrong. In the end, there is a very hypocritical situation, and I say that the president looks so lame and pathetic. There is a plaque on the president's desk that says, "All responsibilities are mine." What are you responsible for now? It's all
, and we're just passing all the employees down there on responsibility. Are their pensions, their civil service, their families themselves responsible? I don't understand why you're destroying other people's lives when you're a very likely person to be arrested anyway and you can't even take responsibility. The Minister of Defense has been arrested. And then the counterintelligence commander was arrested. The commander of the water defense has been arrested. Special Forces commander arrested. The police chief has been arrested. The head of the Seoul Metropolitan Government has been arrested. All of the high-ranking positions that he appointed because he wanted to rebel are arrested. But why are you hiding comfortably in your official residence? If you take responsibility and say that martial law is justifiable, it is right to say that our men did nothing wrong and that it is my responsibility.
[Anchor]
However, Park Jong-joon and the head of the Security Support Division, who are classified as relatively moderate in the command of the Security Service, attended the police. Hard-liners are now refusing to attend, but in the end, there will be a crack in the bodyguard's single battalion and the arrest warrant will be at a disadvantage. What do you think about this?
[Choi Jin-nyeong]
In the end, I think it's a tragedy to approach that way, as I said. As I said, we need to look at this issue in a bigger frame. In fact, as in this case, the president of Yoon Suk Yeol was chosen through direct voting by the entire nation. And as you know, the president's declaration of emergency martial law is basically an act of governance. That's why the judiciary refrains from governing when it comes to basic traditional constitutional law, and that's why even in the United States, the court has not properly judged the allegations of civil war against President Trump. It's also true that I was angry at the beginning with a lot of the bad memories of the emergency martial law and the memories of losing all the weekends.
However, if you look at the current situation through what President Yoon wanted to do, don't many people sympathize with the criticism that the Democratic Party of Korea defines the right wing of freedom, including President Yoon Suk Yeol, as a group of incitement to rebellion and completely exterminate the right wing of freedom? That's why I'm not saying let's protect President Yoon. I'm talking about the constitutional principle that the actual truth told in the Constitution should be observed in accordance with due process, and furthermore, I'm talking about the situation of protecting the basic liberal democratic order in the full text of the Constitution.
Perhaps that's why the liberal rightists, who were very critical of President Yoon Suk Yeol's emergency martial law in the early days, and even centrist citizens, saw the Democratic Party's seemingly endless impeachment, impeachment, impeachment, and impeachment after impeachment. He talked about the impeachment of Prime Minister Han Deok-soo and even the impeachment of Acting President Choi Sang-mok. Furthermore, the first reason related to the recent impeachment of President Yoon Suk Yeol was that President Yoon placed too much importance on South Korea, the U.S., Japan, and belittled North Korea, China, and Russia as his first reason for impeachment, and that he had a strong policy of checking North Korea when he said that he would conduct a special prosecution against Yoon Suk Yeol. Many people are anxious about using that as a reason for impeachment and special prosecution.
In that sense, I would like to say that the Democratic Party should return to principle in this way because it can cause a backlash against the Democratic Party when it goes to the trend of trying to steal the government rather than trying to protect the people's livelihood and economy.
[Anchor]
Since you mentioned the Special Prosecutor Act, I will briefly talk about the Special Prosecutor Act. Six opposition parties, including the Democratic Party of Korea, have reissued the Insurrection Special Prosecution Act, and let's hear from floor leader Kwon Sung-dong and supreme council member Kim Min-seok about what the ruling and opposition parties have talked about. If you look at the proposals proposed by the six opposition parties, you have excluded the recommendation of a third party, the right to veto, and the parts that the ruling party is protesting against.Ma added the foreign exchange crime, and the ruling party criticized this as the so-called Kim Yo-jong Special Prosecutor Act. What do you think about this?
[Lee Seung-hoon]
[Lee Seung-hoon]
A bill was proposed to punish those who violated the law, and the Kim Yo-jung Special Prosecutor Act itself continues to take actions to create disputes. First of all, it was customary in the past to recommend it by the opposition. So is the special prosecutor Choi Soon-sil and the special prosecutor Druking. Nevertheless, as the ruling party argued, it gave the chief justice the right to recommend. The Chief Justice is appointed by the President of Yoon Suk Yeol. Would he intentionally manipulate against them? I don't think so. In addition, the opposition party had the power to criticize and demand that the person recommended by the Chief Justice of the Supreme Court be recommended again, but this was also eliminated. And the investigation period has been drastically reduced.
The investigation staff has also been drastically reduced. Almost all of them received the ruling party's proposal. The opposition insisted on this. If you send a drone to North Korea and listen to former commander Roh Sang-won's story now, it's been revealed one after another that he tried to do martial law against North Korea by provoking it, so he added a foreign exchange crime. Nevertheless, if the opposition party is really willing to talk, I think this is also a part that can be withdrawn. It's the part that can be agreed upon. That's why you have to talk. You can't because you did this and that. You can't because you did that. And if you can't do this or that, you end up saying you don't want to do an independent counsel, and the president says he won't be investigated by the police. Can't you see it? That's why we need to show the seriousness of the public authority, and I would like to say that the execution of an arrest warrant against President Yoon Suk Yeol must be successful to the Senior Civil Servant Corruption Investigations Unit this time.
[Anchor]
The People's Power of the Insurrection Special Counsel Act said they would discuss their own initiative.The Democratic Party and the six opposition parties plan to vote at the plenary session on the 14th. What will be the departure ticket this time?
[Choi Jin-nyeong]
In fact, in the last case, it was rejected very narrowly by two votes, but from the current trend, I don't think there is a possibility that it will pass. Nevertheless, the current Civil War Special Prosecutor Act is nothing more than a change in the name of the floor leader of the People's Power Party. It is true that the fact that the special prosecutor was the chief justice of the Supreme Court has actually improved to some extent, although he said he would leave the kernel as it is and just go to the shell. However, the scope of the rebellion investigation is more than both the police and the prosecution combined.
In the end, when you look at the contents, you talk as if the president has attracted foreign exchange, but now the Democratic Party of Korea sees North Korea as a foreign country? Foreign exchange is, for example, attracting foreign countries to war. According to Article 4 of the Constitution of the Republic of Korea, North Korea is a territory of the Republic of Korea because it is an annexed island to the Korean Peninsula, and it is only an unclaimed area, and it is legally impossible for something that has been done as a military policy to be foreign exchange.
By the way, they call it a foreign exchange crime that cannot be legally done, and leave that part to the special prosecutor, not the prosecution, to investigate? This is what pro-North Korea, pro-North Korea, pro-North Korea, pro-Russian, and that's why many people are questioning whether the Democratic Party is in the right direction to go in this situation. Therefore, in this regard, I also have a question of whether it is right for the police to investigate, not the prosecution. Then, I think one way is to conduct a special prosecution as a third alternative. However, I think the Democratic Party leadership should know that if it is to clarify the subject of the special prosecutor's appointment, the scope of the investigation related to the special prosecutor, and to stabilize this part within a short period of time.
[Anchor]
I see. I'll stop listening to it. So far, I've been with lawyer Choi Jin-nyeong and lawyer Lee Seung-hoon. Thank you.
※ 'Your report becomes news'
[Kakao Talk] YTN Search and Add Channel
[Phone] 02-398-8585
[Mail] social@ytn. co. kr
[Copyright holder (c) YTN Unauthorized reproduction, redistribution and use of AI data prohibited]
Politics
More- People's Power "President Yoon's arrest, physical conflict, and blood loss are not allowed"
- Yoon will not appear at the first hearing of the impeachment trial...Ruling and opposition parties fight over censorship of social media
- Minjoo's plane criticized for "Censorship of KakaoTalk" and said, "Reviewing the problem after receiving a fake news report."
- The ruling party "cannot accept additional special prosecutors for foreign exchange crimes"...MIN JU, "I'm an accomplice of rebellion".
![[Exclusive] Senior Civil Servant Corruption Investigations Unit examines the right to indemnify and compensate the presidential office's security office.](https://image.ytn.co.kr/general/jpg/2025/0112/202501121618524601_h.jpg)
![[Y Ranking] Fashion Worst Lee Dahee, Ji-Soo, Joo Jong-hyuk, Lee Se-young, Jang Da-ah.](https://image.ytn.co.kr/general/jpg/2025/0112/202501120801016836_h.jpg)
