[News UP] "Yoon's arrest warrant" will be executed this week?Security services are showing signs of cracking.

■ Host: anchor Yoon Jae-hee
■ Starring: Choi Soo-young, current affairs critic, Park Chang-hwan, special professor at Jangan University

* The text below may differ from the actual broadcast content, so please check the broadcast for more accurate information. Please specify [YTN News UP] when quoting.

[Anchor]
Let's take a closer look at the relevant content. We will be joined by Choi Soo-young, a current affairs critic, and Park Chang-hwan, a special professor at Jangan University. Please come in. President Yoon submitted a lawyer appointment to the Senior Civil Servant Corruption Investigations Unit yesterday. It is known that he made the request to postpone the execution of the arrest warrant until after the conclusion of the impeachment trial. You're saying that it's not appropriate to execute an arrest warrant even though you still maintain your status as president, right?

[Choi Soo-young]
That's right. It's the 8th. At that time, I submitted the appointment of a lawyer to the Senior Civil Servant Corruption Investigations Unit once. At that time, the Senior Civil Servant Corruption Investigations Unit refused to accept it for other reasons, so it was canceled, but what we did this time was that the president's lawyers asked for a behind-the-scenes conversation in order to prevent this situation, which is leading to a confrontation between the two.

In particular, while talking with officials from the Senior Civil Servant Corruption Investigations Unit in the process of submitting a lawyer's appointment, we can't admit that we got an illegal warrant for the Senior Civil Servant Corruption Investigations Unit or an unauthorized agency, but the senior manager is submitting a warrant anyway. In a way, analysts say that the president's personal security process can have a very negative impact on the Constitutional Court's hearing.

Isn't it known that the Senior Civil Servant Corruption Investigations Unit has received a lot of arrest warrant time to discuss this part with a little time, even during the Lunar New Year holiday? If that's the case, at least it's not important for the president to be handcuffed and pulled out by a gunboat, to achieve the purpose of the arrest warrant, but to get a meaningful statement from the president or to make a final point or confirmation of it when all the key workers involved are being prosecuted, isn't the goal to get enough statements from the president by setting a place and time rather than using physical force to secure a presidential recruit?

If so, I think it's right to have a behind-the-scenes conversation with the lawyers in this regard. I think it's time to think about whether the clash between the Senior Civil Servant Corruption Investigations Unit, the police, and the security service will be revealed in the truth of this substantive case at the beginning of the new year, and whether it will help national prestige.

[Anchor]
You said that you think the Senior Civil Servant Corruption Investigations Unit can discuss it over time, what do you think, professor?

[PARK CHANG HWAN]
We usually appoint a lawyer. Then, in order to protect the defense during investigation or trial, an attorney is appointed for the exercise of defense rights. However, if you look at the appointment of a lawyer to the Senior Civil Servant Corruption Investigations Unit now, it can only be interpreted that he did not appoint an attorney to be investigated, but eventually appointed an attorney to hold out and endure.

Haven't you been turning a blind eye to your attendance request for the past month? But now, as you said, if you interpret it in a good way, I'll be investigated now, so let's do it in a special place. Even if I say this, it's not possible or not. The people watched as the warrant was destroyed by the public power, and also by the public power of the public officials. I'll appear in this situation, so don't execute the warrant. If this happens, there's room for consideration, but what I'm saying now after appointing a lawyer is that can't I be tried for impeachment and investigated? This is what I'm talking about.

How many people will be able to sympathize with this story? If you ask me to at least be investigated in a few days, where will I be investigated? If this is the case, we can think about it in a respectful way to maintain the law and order of warrant execution in the current severe division of public opinion, but I will not be investigated after the impeachment trial. In that respect, I have no choice but to say that it is the appointment of a lawyer for dragging time, not the assistance of a lawyer who really ignored the law and order.

[Anchor]
Lawyer Seok Dong-hyun also posted this on social media. The reason why the Senior Civil Servant Corruption Investigations Unit is trying to arrest President Yoon is to show that he intends to keep his feet tied so that he cannot attend the Constitutional Court. How did you like it?

[PARK CHANG HWAN]
Who brought such an extreme scene on themselves? It's as if the police are blocking the president from getting out of the Constitutional Court right now, but isn't it too much even if the front and back change? President Yoon Suk Yeol is holding a sit-in in it. This would not have happened if the National Investigation Headquarters or the investigation rights had been transferred and the Senior Civil Servant Corruption Investigations Unit said they would be investigated at a third place.

So far, however, the Constitutional Court has refused to accept documents related to impeachment and requests for attendance from the police or the Senior Civil Servant Corruption Investigations Unit, and it is as if the execution of such a warrant is a show to fill and show the president. I thought the perpetrator might be playing the victim's costume, so we can only say that this is sophistry. [Anchor] Is it because of the same reason? President Yoon's opinion is that he will not attend tomorrow due to concerns about his personal safety.

[Choi Soo-young]
There is a situation where the execution of the arrest warrant by the Senior Civil Servant Corruption Investigations Unit and the defense of the security service overlap, but if the Senior Civil Servant Corruption Investigations Unit decides to execute the arrest warrant in the middle of the situation when it is not coordinated when it is going out tomorrow, there is nothing to say. In a way, I think it's right to say this as a defense. However, if the Senior Civil Servant Corruption Investigations Unit executes an arrest warrant at this time and is detained for 48 hours and then prosecuted through investigation, the president's whereabouts are secured by the investigative agency. Then you can't go.

So, from a legal point of view, lawyer Seok's story is right, so this is what it is. Then, is there a gentleman's agreement between the two sides that they will not execute arrest warrants while the president attends the Constitutional Court? So let's talk about this with us because we submitted a lawyer appointment. At least if a lawyer is appointed and the investigative agency agrees, it has public confidence. If so, President Yoon will do the same.

Because it is widely believed that the president will appear once during the five hearings given until February 4, so isn't it a bad idea to appear at the Constitutional Court's hearing quickly? However, there is no guarantee that the president's mobile vehicle will not be dispatched to the Senior Civil Servant Corruption Investigations Unit without such uncertainty being removed, right? In that respect, I think the Senior Civil Servant Corruption Investigations Unit can check these things a little bit. It's already been a week since the arrest warrant was postponed, but we're not executing it yet, so we won't execute it until at least some time.

So, after going to the Constitutional Court's hearing, wouldn't it be okay to talk to us again and say we'll notify you then? However, after making the timing and situation completely opaque, this appearance of continuing to pressure the president's isolation is bound to raise concerns that the Senior Civil Servant Corruption Investigations Unit's purpose is to unite its supporters over there through insulting the president rather than the actual truth about the investigation. So I think it would be okay for the Senior Civil Servant Corruption Investigations Unit to find a sense of balance in this regard.

[Anchor]
The opinion is that in order to speed up the hearing, an agreement on this part between the Senior Civil Servant Corruption Investigations Unit and the president's lawyers is necessary.

[PARK CHANG HWAN]
You just need to be investigated. That's why an arrest warrant was issued because President Yoon Suk Yeol has so far refused to investigate. Even if you are investigated and arrested by the Senior Civil Servant Corruption Investigations Unit, the Senior Civil Servant Corruption Investigations Unit will go out to plead with the Constitutional Court, so would the Senior Civil Servant Corruption Investigations Unit prevent that? It's not an arrest to cover the president's mouth and keep him out of the Constitutional Court. Now, the rebellion is the last stage of investigation into the head of the rebellion at a time when all the major workers are already being arrested and prosecuted.

I will arrest him if he needs to be arrested after the investigation, and if he doesn't, I won't, but I don't see any investigative agency stopping him when the president says he will go to the Constitutional Court to argue whether he is arrested or not. Therefore, it is necessary to make the most of your right to plead within the judicial order system of the Republic of Korea. One side rejects the judicial order called warrant execution and says, "I have to go out to the Constitutional Court, but I can't go out because I'm blocked like this." How can that be the exercise of the right to plead within the legal order?

[Anchor]
Ahead of the execution of the arrest warrant for the president, the atmosphere at his residence is unusual, and there are reports that cracks are occurring inside the security office. There was an article on the internal network that said it would be illegal to prevent the execution of a warrant. It was deleted once under the direction of Deputy Director Kim Sung-hoon and was reportedly restored due to internal opposition. It is said that this article is being actively shared, but it is said that there is a considerable amount of agitation inside.

[Choi Soo-young]
I think that's a possibility. So, isn't the Senior Civil Servant Corruption Investigations Unit a state agency anyway, and the security agency is also a state agency responsible for the president's safety? The institutions and agencies are now in conflict with each other, claiming each other's legality. In a way, even if it is unreasonable and slightly illegal when the Senior Civil Servant Corruption Investigations Unit gets a warrant, there is a majority opinion that a warrant issued by a court has no choice but to accept it because we are adopting warrant-firstism.

In that respect, from the perspective of the security agency, once an arrest warrant attempt was canceled after five and a half hours of confrontation to refrain from physical conflict, but if it comes in the second round, will we be able to defend it to the end? Because the command has already explicitly stated that it will not cooperate with the military and police, who are currently in charge of outer security, the only remaining manpower is the security service, but it is probably true that there is a heated debate internally in this regard about whether the security service, which is estimated to be about 700 people, can defend the president in good order.

Furthermore, in the process, Chief Park Jong-joon said he would protect the president until the end, but at some point, the third arrest warrant was investigated in terms of not being able to ignore the police, and a head of the security headquarters was also investigated. In the meantime, there is a signal that there is a crack in the command in the single battalion that these processes have not been able to retreat even a single inch. So, I think these processes are probably where the Senior Civil Servant Corruption Investigations Unit and the police continue to conduct psychological warfare while operating a collaborative version.

There seems to be a psychological battle about how long you will defend yourself when the commanders cooperate with us in the investigation. Anyway, I think controversy within the security office and consensus within the security office are more important in this regard, and no matter how much deputy chief Kim Sung-hoon, who represents the security office, holds the key, isn't it natural that once there is a crack here, it loses its strength? In that respect, I think it will be important to unify the opinions of the security service in a few days.

[Anchor]
Isn't the bodyguard a group with a clear culture of upper and lower classes? Nevertheless, it was confirmed that there was an internal backlash to the order to delete it now, and there was also talk of demanding the resignation of Deputy Director Kim Sung-hoon at an internal meeting of the Security Agency.

[PARK CHANG HWAN]
In the meantime, I can't help but wonder if blocking a warrant is preventing it. I'm a government employee servant. Civil servants are people who live looking at pensions, and if they interfere with the execution of special public affairs, they will not only be subject to aggravated punishment, but will also cause financial problems for their own retirement and families in the future. It's a very troubling problem to take care of this and protect it. So, if it's been an individual or individual concern, this led to the voluntary attendance and resignation of the security chief, and the complaints that I endured began to be collective, that's how I see it.

In particular, it seems that the complaints that the hard-liners endured exploded when they said that President Yoon Suk Yeol mentioned the use of guns and demanded them, saying that hard-liners should wear helmets and carry guns in their operational clothes. Are we last January 3rd? I saw it during the first warrant execution, but at that time, I planned and blocked the scrum unarmed. However, as the intensity of the second round of execution is increasing, there are even gun problems now.

Under these circumstances, so-called middle-level officials are collectively protesting against attracting security officials, and these reports suggest that hard-liners' voices are gradually losing ground. If this happens, the police are dragging their feet in the second round of execution and destroying the leadership of the security service, but we can only see that this is working to some extent, and isn't there a third call for the hard-line leadership to attend today and tomorrow?

If you refuse even this, an arrest warrant will be issued. Then there is no way to prevent the issuance of arrest warrants for the leadership of the security service. Then, along with the arrest of the hardline leadership of the security service, the possibility of an arrest warrant being executed against President Yoon Suk Yeol has really increased, so now is the moment of choice for the security service. If you make the wrong choice here, you will really make an impossible mistake in the history of the Republic of Korea, so I think the security office should think carefully.

[Anchor]
The ruling and opposition parties are expected to clash again this week over the Insurrection Special Prosecutors Act. First of all, the power of the people is to discuss the proposal of their own independent counsel, right?

[Choi Soo-young]
That's right. So, from the perspective of the people's power, the Democratic Party of Korea has been issuing the Insurrection Special Prosecutor Act, but the reason to reject it is not a third-party recommendation method. Since the introduction of the special prosecutor in 1999, there have been many special prosecutors, but nine times, so five times, the Korean Bar Association, and four times, the Chief Justice of the Supreme Court recommended them. The fact that about two-thirds did so proves that the ruling and opposition parties agreed to do it because it was a way to ensure fairness. But in the case of this special prosecutor, of course, the Democratic Party withdrew, but that part.
So the Democratic Party withdrew it because it had to exercise its right to veto it unconditionally and said it would go in the direction the Democratic Party wanted, but as a result, the toxic clause seems to have been omitted, but there are more new additions, so it is difficult to do this. Because the ruling party also needs a special prosecutor for rebellion. This is because the harsh confrontation between the Senior Civil Servant Corruption Investigations Unit and the Security Service is ultimately for the president's investigation.

If there is an independent counsel, no one can oppose or resist it, so if there is an independent counsel, the people's power agrees, there is literally a point where all Koreans can agree on this, so let's go with this. However, if the Democratic Party of Korea's toxic clause is removed from the special prosecution for rebellion, the people's power will be added anew. Then, it should be very limited, very precise, and only for finding out the actual truth, but it should not contain such things that are harmful to the national interest, right?

In that respect, the Democratic Party of Korea wants to elaborate on the power of the people, but I think the Democratic Party of Korea will agree on this. If the special prosecutor thinks that the investigation is actually the last step toward finding the truth by excluding the parts that are against the national interest, wouldn't it be okay to set the stage for finding the truth? I'll make such a hopeful order.

[Anchor]
It's something that the Democratic Party needs to agree on, so what do you think should be included?

[PARK CHANG HWAN]
First of all, will I be able to come up with a special prosecutor's proposal from the power of the people? I have a question here, first of all. So, about 40 pro-Yoon lawmakers flocked to the front of the official residence, saying they would block the execution of the warrant last time, and even now, the chairmen of the party's cooperation committee take turns to form a group and guard the front of the official residence. In this situation, what President Yoon Suk Yeol is saying is that he will not receive any special prosecution. President Yoon Suk Yeol says he won't receive any special prosecution, but if so, will the strong and pro-Youns propose a special prosecution proposal from the power of the people? Will you really agree to this?

In that sense, he said he would propose a special prosecution law in the name of all 108 people, but now his words are changing. Some lawmakers are proposing the Special Prosecutor Act, which is changing the content like this. So, can the independent counsel law be proposed in the name of all lawmakers? I'm starting a discussion now, not that I'm going to put this out. Then, in fact, there is no schedule for how long the discussion will be. In that sense, there are doubts about whether this is really going to come up with a special prosecution law or drag on.

Second, they say that foreign exchange crimes can never be committed. It's also funny to say that when we talk about martial law rebellion, let's investigate only six hours related to martial law. Because is there anyone who thinks the civil war is over now? This chaos in the Republic of Korea took us 15 years to punish a successful coup. It took 15 years for Chun Doo-hwan and Roh Tae-woo to be sentenced by the Supreme Court. The failed civil war has not even begun to investigate the leader. In this case, various investigations are inevitable in order for such martial law and civil war to end properly.

In particular, it is said that there have been provocations from the North to induce North Korea's provocations in the process of being arrested by intelligence agencies and such officials. And it's already been revealed that there was a discussion that he would use martial law as an excuse, so what are you going to investigate if you don't investigate this? In other words, before winning the opposition parties' sympathy, will they be able to come up with an independent counsel plan that can win the public's sympathy? Except for the six-hour investigation and the foreign exchange crime, and the propaganda of the civil war, I've really talked about it so far. It's a steamed bun without Angkko. What do you investigate with steamed buns without Angkko? In that sense, will there be a special prosecution bill that can win public consensus? I think it's an expectation.

[Choi Soo-young]
If I tell you briefly, of course, you can say that. But it's this. When we say we will discard the Special Prosecutor Act and make a new Special Prosecutor Act, we will narrow our opinions and make an agreement, not to expand the front line by expanding the political dispute. But it looks like it's taken out one, but in reality, it's a magnification of the wire.

By the way, the court administration has also explicitly stated that in these security cases, state secrets should not be leaked. But if you go out on an unlimited basis like this. So you have to reduce it. Is the police also a former intelligence commander, Roh Sang-won? Regarding the notebook, I took it out of the indictment saying it was only for personal ideas. So it hasn't been realized, and let's just look at the idea level at the special prosecutor's office. And in this process, let's investigate the suspicion of propaganda instigation against one word and look into all the collateral things about what came out. In this case, where is our country actually going?

In fact, when the Democratic Party lawmakers flew in the filth balloon, some people like Kim Byung-joo shot them and criticized them for taking it out. Therefore, I will additionally say that the purpose of this is to narrow differences and conduct an independent investigation as soon as possible, but it is not in line with each other's purpose to create more political disputes.

[Anchor]
I think it should be a discussion at the party level, not the opinions of some lawmakers. In addition, some point out that this is a strategy to appease the leave vote, which is coming out of the people's power every time the Democratic Party evaluates it as a time-consuming strategy.

[Choi Soo-young]
Of course, you can look at it like that. However, how long will it last when the people's power is still the public party and the ruling party? And the longer you endure this, the greater the demand for the special prosecutor if the conflict between the investigative agencies is not resolved. That's why I think there's a story about us actually blocking this part with phlegm and blocking it with a hoe, right? You should be able to block it when it's small. How long will the special prosecutor be able to defend the power of the people and not be able to do the special prosecutor law?

I don't think so. If the Democratic Party continues to take out a little bit of toxic clauses and talk arithmetically, it will be a decision of the special prosecution law if it gets two more votes. So I think it's important that the power of the people be sincere and that the Democratic Party has a grand attitude to accept the power of the people through negotiations that open up the room, so it's up to the negotiating power now.

[Anchor]
But now, the Democratic Party seems to be in a position not to wait for the power of the people. We will pass the amendment at this week's plenary session, right?

[PARK CHANG HWAN]
So, as you said, if the people's power really comes up with a sincere alternative and the majority of the people say that this is not enough, but the first thing to do is to reach an agreement to overcome the current turmoil, then of course the Democratic Party of Korea should follow suit. However, let's investigate for six hours what is being said now, there is no propaganda of rebellion, no foreign exchange. I'm going to discuss the proposal that this doesn't work and that doesn't work. I'm not even putting it out. If you come up with a proposal and then negotiate, I don't know if there will be room for negotiation, but I'll start talking internally, not taking out the car and putting it out. How can you believe this in such a situation?

In this regard, I believe that the power of the people is only starting this discussion to prevent the departure vote, since we decided to receive the recommendation of a third party, which was the biggest crisis. In the end, with the situation expected to be around the 16th, whether the discussion will progress until then and there will be no more leave votes, or whether the independent counsel will pass with more than 200 seats in favor as the discussion is sluggish.

[Anchor]
There is also the Special Prosecutor Act, where the ruling and opposition parties are competing. There's another thing that's newly appeared right now. It is a so-called Kakaotalk censorship controversy, but it is controversial that a Democratic Party lawmaker filed a complaint against conservative YouTubers and said, "I will file a complaint if the general public spreads fake news about civil war." First of all, how did you hear this?

[Choi Soo-young]
I overstepped considerably even if the Democrats overstepped. And then this is an example of if you don't withdraw quickly, if you don't withdraw quickly, you're defending this in a number of words, but if you don't withdraw quickly, the Democratic Party is not a Democratic Party because this is legally a crime of incitement of insurrection. It is an act of encouraging propaganda and execution of civil war, but the civil war has already ended. Martial law has been lifted. But why should the act of propaganda and encouragement to resolve and implement a civil war be a problem after death?

And now the Democratic Party of Korea is asking to remove the crime of rebellion from this impeachment bill. It doesn't make sense to ask to exclude the crime of rebellion and add the crime of inciting rebellion to this, does it? So I think the Democratic Party is probably like this right now. Looking at various polling landscapes, the power of the people suddenly rose in about two to three weeks. I think the ruling party's supporters gathered because of the spread of fake news, but they know the people as fools.

If the people are deceived by fake news and the camp gathers and the approval rating goes up, if the Democratic Party believes so, it's self-inflicted. It's simply delusional. So, the people have the ability to reason and censor information, but they are linked to fake news and disrupt their judgment standards? If you're a Democrat who believes that, you shouldn't be a member of the National Assembly. In that respect, I don't think it's worth a penny.

This issue is a violation of the Constitution, regardless of the people's right to know. Isn't it a violation of freedom of expression? In a nutshell, this is unconstitutional. It's self-righteousness to say that you did a good job with such an unconstitutional idea and that the power of the people reacts excessively. So I don't have to talk about it for a long time, and the Democratic Party of Korea should quickly come up with an exit strategy and get out of it. If we talk about it more, we will fall into a deep quagmire.

[Anchor]
But now, the Democratic Party has no plans to withdraw. The plan is to maintain a hard-line response policy to fake news. How should I look at it?

[PARK CHANG HWAN]
We're a blatant civil war incitement, there's already precedents on this, there's precedents. Punishing this is a matter of sufficient possibility. In fact, there is no precedent and no precedent for the propaganda of civil war. Who would have thought the president would wage a civil war through martial law? Also, since this is the first time such a case itself, it is very unfamiliar to call it propaganda of civil war, and there may be controversy over the extent to which it is. But if you look at what's going on, we all feel that it's very dangerous.

In the meantime, the act of illegally driving the court's execution of a warrant and preventing the execution of a warrant in front of it by lawmakers, party chairmen, party members and the general public. And the act of selling a judicial institution. The act of neutralizing the judicial order, which itself is highly likely to be a propaganda incitement of rebellion. Also, the story from that rally goes way over the line. They are advertising in the newspaper to subdue the Constitutional Court.

They're inciting us to attack the Constitutional Court. So do I have to condone this? We should ignore this logic of arguing that the law and order of the Republic of Korea should break up and attack the Constitutional Court, no matter how much freedom democracy has to form a press publishing assembly. Of course, we have to warn you about this. It is inevitable for me to impose criminal and civil legal sanctions on it if I warn you and tell you to find your reason and don't listen to it.

However, since the scope of the civil war is so wide that the Democratic Party has room to think about that, but the people's power should step up and say that the current aspect is clearly trying to neutralize the judicial order and neutralize the constitutional spirit, and that the media and some conservative supporters should not sympathize with it, but they are sympathizing with it. In that respect, the danger to the propaganda of civil war, a warning about this part. Obviously, I think this needs to go ahead.

[Anchor]
I'll ask you a short question about the strategy of responding to the people's power. You told me to file a complaint first, and I've even launched a campaign to recruit defendants for propaganda of civil war, what do you think?

[Choi Soo-young]
So let's say you can sue people who make such false accusations for defamation or something like that. By the way, do ordinary people who accept it punish you for seeing it? So even if I went out of the line, I went out too much. So, I think what this relay is is that the Democratic Party of Korea has defeated itself, but from the perspective of the power of the people, is this really the democratic spirit that the Democratic Party has been talking about? Are you really covering your mouth so much when I told you not to muzzle yourselves?

So, I think this part can rather undermine the legitimacy of the current civil war that the Democratic Party is claiming, so it is natural for the people's power to go out like this, but the Democratic Party continues to lead with this. It's a really great help to the power of the people. In my view, it will also call for a massive exodus of the middle class.

[Anchor]
I see. I'll stop listening to it. I talked with Choi Soo-young, a current affairs critic, and Park Chang-hwan, a special professor at Jangan University. Thank you.