Reporter Baek Jong-gyu + Attorney Seo Jeong-bin's Plaintiff

■ Host: anchor Yoo Da-won, anchor Kim Myung-geun, anchor
■ Starring: Baek Jong-gyu, social affairs reporter, lawyer Seo Jeong-bin,

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

[Anchor]
Let's take a closer look at the related contents, including the arrest of President Yoon Suk Yeol. Reporter Baek Jong-kyu of the Ministry of Social Affairs and lawyer Seo Jeong-bin are here. Welcome, two of you. an arresting review filed by the President of Yoon Suk Yeol It ended in about 2 hours. Please explain this part first.

[Reporter]
The screening was conducted from 5 p.m. today. And just after 7 o'clock, the news broke that it ended in two hours. The results of the arresting pride have not yet come out. First of all, one senior prosecutor and two rank-and-file prosecutors attended the interrogation and expressed their opinions at the Senior Civil Servant Corruption Investigations Unit today.

On the Yoon Suk Yeol's side, three lawyers, including lawyer Seok Dong-hyun, attended. Arrest suitability is a system in which the court examines whether the arrest of an investigative agency is legitimate and releases it by making a citation decision if it is inappropriate or unfair. If rejected, the arrest can continue. These are the contents of Article 12 of the Constitution and Article 214 (2) of the Criminal Procedure Act.

[Anchor]
The arrest suit lasted about two hours today, but the president did not attend. Does it have no effect on proceeding even if the arrest suspect does not attend?

[Jeongbin Seo]
First of all, in the case of an arrest suit, there is a rule that the court must interrogate the suspect, so there is an opinion that a hearing cannot be conducted if he does not attend. However, there is no clear regulation that any conclusion is made in case of non-attendance, so given the situation in the court now, President Yoon is expected to decide whether to cite or dismiss the agents, even though he did not attend.

[Anchor]
As you said, President Yoon requested to determine the legality of the arrest, but it means that the execution process of the arrest warrant issued by the Seoul Western District Court is illegal.

[Reporter]
Prior to the arrest, President Yoon Suk Yeol completely denied the legitimacy of the Senior Civil Servant Corruption Investigations Unit's investigation, arguing that if there is enough evidence, prosecute it in court or seek an arrest warrant from the Seoul Central District Court if investigation is needed. It is also noteworthy that the arrest suit was filed with the Seoul Central District Court, not the Seoul Western District Court, which issued the arrest warrant.

It is interpreted as a strategy to move the stage of the legal battle to the Central District Court rather than the Seoul Western District Court in preparation for the request for an arrest warrant. The possibility of issuing an arrest warrant later in the Central District Court may be a little lower than in the Seoul Western District Court. The request for an arrest investigation is aimed at turning the tide as an extension of the previous claim that the Senior Civil Servant Corruption Investigations Unit does not have the authority to investigate the alleged rebellion.

[Anchor]
As you said, the Senior Civil Servant Corruption Investigations Unit issued the first arrest warrant and executed the arrest warrant by getting another one, but President Yoon's side requested an arrest suit to the Central District Court this time. Then, does the Central District Court have the authority to hear an arrest suit?

[Jeongbin Seo]
In fact, there is an ambiguous point in this part, too. First of all, it's hard to find a case. In general, it can be said that most or all of them request an arrest suit from the court that issued the arrest warrant. There is no regulation on the case where the court that issued the arrest warrant and the court that examines it are different as it is now.

However, the criminal procedure law stipulates that the arrested suspect can make a claim to the competent court. Therefore, in the case of the Central District Court, it is correct that it is a court with a principle jurisdiction over the investigation of the Senior Civil Servant Corruption Investigations Unit, and since it has the authority to control the current location of President Yoon, that is, the Seoul Detention Center, I think that if I look at this regulation in the end, I can see that it is authorized, and I think the court will eventually judge it now on the premise of this.

[Anchor]
In fact, lawyer Seok Dong-hyun also revealed the reason for the claim to the Central District Court, although he showed it in a report earlier. It means that the court under the jurisdiction of the Seoul Detention Center is the Central District Court, so please tell me again how to view this part.

[Reporter]
If both the right to investigate and prosecute are in the Senior Civil Servant Corruption Investigations Unit, they can also be prosecuted in a court other than the Central District Court. However, in the case of the president, the Senior Civil Servant Corruption Investigations Unit does not have the right to prosecute. In the end, the Seoul Central District Prosecutors' Office must file an indictment with the Seoul Central District Court, so the court in charge is the Seoul Central District Court.

However, the Senior Civil Servant Corruption Investigations Unit claims that only prosecution is under the jurisdiction of the Seoul Central District Court, and that arrest or search of seizure can be requested to the court having jurisdiction over the place where the alleged crime occurred. President Yoon Suk Yeol also argues that the investigation itself is illegal because the Senior Civil Servant Corruption Investigations Unit does not have the right to investigate the president's alleged rebellion. It seems that there will have been a battle on this part.

[Anchor]
What are some of the objections that the Senior Civil Servant Corruption Investigations Unit or President Yoon can take, whether they are quoted and released or dismissed about an hour ago?

[Reporter]
If you look at Article 214 of the Criminal Procedure Act, there are also related regulations. The court that received the claim must interrogate the arrested or detained suspect within 48 hours of receipt of the claim, investigate the investigation-related documents and evidence, dismiss it by decision, and order the release of the arrested or detained suspect if the claim is deemed reasonable.

In the end, the request for arrest and detention review results in dismissal or citation, that is, release. The dismissal and release are made by decision, but they cannot be appealed. Even if you disagree accordingly, there is nothing you can ask the court to take action separately.

[Anchor]
In fact, the situation will vary a lot depending on the outcome, but since the arrest investigation has been interrogated, what will happen to the next process?

[Jeongbin Seo]
In fact, all that's left is for the court to review and decide after all. Of course, each opinion can be submitted in writing before the Senior Civil Servant Corruption Investigations Unit or President Yoon's side comes to a conclusion. However, it can be seen that this is done outside the court and not a court dispute. Therefore, in the end, all that is left is to wait for the court's judgment.

[Anchor]
The interrogation ended about an hour ago, how many hours does it usually take for the results to come out?

[Jeongbin Seo]
In fact, such arresting pride is not common, but it can also be concluded fairly quickly. So, in general, it can be said that there are many cases where a conclusion is reached even later that evening, but even so, the hearing time is a little longer than other cases, and both sides' arguments must have been very different. So, I expect that a conclusion will be made as early as tomorrow morning.

[Anchor]
If the request for an arrest suit is accepted, it will be released, but President Yoon also said he expects a good result from the arrest suit. What are the possibilities?

[Reporter]
In fact, as the lawyer said earlier, it is evaluated that the results of the citation of the arrest suit are rare. And in fact, it is evaluated that the claim itself is rare. Whether the competent court itself is wrong at all, or whether the Miranda principle was not notified during the arrest process, or various rights to be notified under the Criminal Procedure Act were not notified. It is known that it is only cited when there is such a formal error or a clear error.

As mentioned earlier, both requesting arrest suitability and the decision to cite are very exceptional cases. For this reason, I would like to emphasize once again that the investigation of the Senior Civil Servant Corruption Investigations Unit is unfair that President Yoon Suk Yeol has requested an arrest investigation.

It also seems to reiterate that the issuance of the Western District Court and the execution of the arrest warrant by the Senior Civil Servant Corruption Investigations Unit are all unfair. At the same time, there are some interpretations that it is a strategy to delay time in preparation for President Yoon Suk Yeol's request for an arrest warrant and arrest and prosecution.

[Anchor]
Anyway, there was an arrest suit in the process of executing the arrest warrant, and according to the criminal law, isn't an arrest warrant requested or released within 48 hours after arresting the suspect? How does this time change when an arrest suit is filed?

[Jeongbin Seo]
In this case, the time of the arrest warrant itself is suspended for that time. According to the Criminal Procedure Act, an arrest suit is filed, and then the evidence or records held by the investigative agency are filed with the court. Then, it is stipulated not to insert these records in 48 hours from that point on until the conclusion of this review is completed and the time these records are returned.

That's why this time is taken out of 48 hours and eventually extended.

[Anchor]
If that happens, won't the original plan be disrupted from the perspective of the Senior Civil Servant Corruption Investigations Unit?

[Jeongbin Seo]
There are many such stories that if it is cited, there may be a setback. Of course, the majority are more likely to be rejected, but if it is cited, in fact, it will be hit hard by the Senior Civil Servant Corruption Investigations Unit. First of all, arrest and arrest are separate, so even if you are quoted from the arrest suit, the Senior Civil Servant Corruption Investigations Unit can request an arrest warrant separately anyway.

However, the fact is that arrest and arrest are actually carried out according to the procedure, so if this arrest is judged to be unnecessary or inappropriate, the possibility of dismissal increases when an arrest warrant with a much greater physical arrest for the suspect is requested.

Therefore, if an arrest suit is cited, isn't it virtually impossible to quickly request an arrest warrant? If you try to request an arrest warrant again, you can see that it would be possible only with further investigation and reinforcement.

[Anchor]
Then, if the Senior Civil Servant Corruption Investigations Unit requests an arrest warrant again when it is cited later, should I do it to the Central District Court? It's not the Western District Court.

[Jeongbin Seo]
Separately, this is a judgment. President Yoon Suk Yeol has filed a claim with the Central District Court, not the Western District Court, but anyway, considering the location of President Yoon Suk Yeol in this case, the Senior Civil Servant Corruption Investigations Unit believes that the Western District Court has jurisdiction, so if it continues, I think it will actually seek an arrest warrant from the Western District Court.

[Anchor]
On the other hand, it was originally yesterday on President Yoon's side, he said he would not seek arrest suit, but changed his position again. What kind of intentions do you see?

[Reporter]
Yesterday, lawyer Seok Dong-hyun said he would not seek an arrest suit. However, lawyer Seok Dong-hyun has been an advisor to the president of Yoon Suk Yeol. It was a situation where there was no formal appointment. However, when I attended the screening today, I went out with a formal appointment. It continued to be called the mouth of the president of Yoon Suk Yeol, and the president's position continued.

However, he was in a situation of confusion and confusion by hastily taking a different position from the lawyers of the president of Yoon Suk Yeol. He acknowledged this himself. As a result, I acknowledged that my answer was hasty through SNS. Therefore, it is known that there was no prior consultation between lawyer Seok Dong-hyun and lawyer Yoon Gap-geun, the official lawyer of President Yoon Suk Yeol. So lawyer Seok predicted the direction of legal action and talked about it.

There are also concerns about such off-beat remarks in the ruling camp. In the end, it is interpreted as a lack of communication between Yoon Suk Yeol's presidential lawyers.

[Anchor]
On the other hand, today was the second day of the investigation by the Senior Civil Servant Corruption Investigations Unit, and President Yoon refused to investigate. I'm not in good health, I fully stated my position yesterday, so if I refuse to investigate, is there any other way?

[Reporter]
First of all, as President Yoon Suk Yeol refuses to comply with the investigation into the Senior Civil Servant Corruption Investigations Unit, the Senior Civil Servant Corruption Investigations Unit is actually deeply concerned. There were also observations such as whether they were conducting a visit to the detention center or trying to forcefully arrest them. However, the Senior Civil Servant Corruption Investigations Unit said that they decided to focus on the examination of the arrest suit.

The Senior Civil Servant Corruption Investigations Unit seems to judge that there are no explicit regulations or precedents on whether a suspect detained under an arrest warrant can be forcibly recruited if he refuses to attend the investigation room. There is a Supreme Court precedent that a detainee with an arrest warrant can be arrested in an investigation room, but it is unclear whether it can be applied to an arrest warrant or applied mutatis mutandis, and if the law is enforced against the presidential suspect, there will be controversy over the law.

The Senior Civil Servant Corruption Investigations Unit is said to be considering requesting an arrest warrant immediately without forcing additional investigation if President Yoon sticks to his refusal to comply with the investigation, even if the results of the arrest investigation are rejected.

[Anchor]
With the suspect refusing to investigate, is there any other way for the Senior Civil Servant Corruption Investigations Unit to investigate the suspect?

[Jeongbin Seo]
In fact, as the reporter explained, I don't actually see a clear way to do this. Of course, a door-to-door investigation is possible, but it is very likely that it will be meaningless in the situation of exercising the right to refuse statements so far, and we can consider how to bring it to a warrant, but in fact, there is controversy over whether we can do it again with this arrest warrant that has already been executed.

Then, there may be some stories about getting a new arrest warrant, but the time limit is too clear. Now, the time left will be about 20 hours in the end, but it seems virtually impossible to obtain an arrest warrant in the meantime, draw a conclusion, and step in.

Therefore, in the end, I think the Senior Civil Servant Corruption Investigations Unit will examine this more carefully how to reinforce the evidence and prove the allegations more in the event of exercising the right to refuse to make a statement anyway, rather than forcibly recruiting something.

[Anchor]
You're saying that the Senior Civil Servant Corruption Investigations Unit is planning to request an arrest warrant as soon as the arrest result comes out, right?

[Jeongbin Seo]
In the end, we can also investigate further, but so far, it seems to have decided that it is meaningless. Therefore, it seems that they will seek an arrest warrant immediately after seeing the results of the arrest suit.

[Anchor]
It will take time, but is there a possibility that you will seek an arrest warrant when you ask for it?

[Jeongbin Seo]
There seems to be a good chance of that. In fact, President Yoon's lawyers previously gave the Senior Civil Servant Corruption Investigations Unit a choice: indicting him without detention, or rather requesting an arrest warrant, I will go out and defend the warrant. This was the position.

Therefore, if the Senior Civil Servant Corruption Investigations Unit requests an arrest warrant, wouldn't President Yoon be able to respond to this? Of course, it seems that we are not sure yet whether the person will attend again.

[Anchor]
And yesterday, in the first day of the investigation, the President of Yoon Suk Yeol refused to make a statement. He exercised his right to remain silent, but he also claimed that declaring martial law was the president's authority.

[Reporter]
That's right. As I told you yesterday, President Yoon Suk Yeol used the right to refuse to make a statement and to remain silent in the investigation of the Senior Civil Servant Corruption Investigations Unit. President Yoon Suk Yeol explained that in the first investigation of the Senior Civil Servant Corruption Investigations Unit immediately after his arrest, he expressed his position that the emergency martial law was justified and the crime of rebellion was not established. However, the document is not stamped, so the evidence ability is not recognized.

However, the investigation situation of the Senior Civil Servant Corruption Investigations Unit is a little different. The Senior Civil Servant Corruption Investigations Unit has prepared more than 200 pages of questions, but President Yoon Suk Yeol does not even answer that he will exercise his right to reject the statement. President Yoon Suk Yeol seems to mean that he will not admit the investigation of the Senior Civil Servant Corruption Investigations Unit, which does not have the right to investigate rebellion.

It also seems to emphasize that the execution of arrest warrants requested by the Senior Civil Servant Corruption Investigations Unit and the current arrest are unfair. He has also repeatedly argued that the crime of rebellion is the president's own authority.

[Anchor]
What do you think is the intention of the president's refusal to respond to the prosecutor's question about what you just said?

[Jeongbin Seo]
First of all, it seems to be insisting once again that there is no right to investigate the Senior Civil Servant Corruption Investigations Unit. Considering that he did not answer any questions about the facts of acknowledgement, that is, who he is, even before specific questions were asked, it seems that I do not need to make a statement about a place where there is no investigative power itself.

And this argument seems to have been consistent because it will be argued in the same way if the trial proceeds in the future. On the other hand, it seems that he would have judged that it was not advantageous to make a statement. In fact, you may make a statement refuting the query when you are naturally denying the allegations.

However, if that happens, the Senior Civil Servant Corruption Investigations Unit may hear the rebuttal and provide additional evidence while presenting related evidence again, or ask additional questions. Or you can find other reinforcing evidence. That's why I think they might have judged that in terms of this content, they won't eventually be used in an advantageous way in the future.

[Anchor]
Reporter Baek explained earlier, but in yesterday's investigation, President Yoon did not even make a statement, but he refused to read and seal the record. So you said that if you don't have a record seal, you can't accept the evidence, so what happens in the future?

[Reporter]
First of all, I told him that he did not answer any questions, exercised his right to refuse to make statements, refused to read the records, and did not seal them. The record without the suspect's seal is taken into account that it cannot be used as evidence in future trials. Yoon Suk Yeol's side basically said that the president would exercise his guaranteed rights as a subject in the course of the investigation.

As the lawyer said earlier, the investigation by the Senior Civil Servant Corruption Investigations Unit is still insisting that it is illegal. Therefore, exercising the right to refuse to make a statement without stamping the record seems to be an example of not by words but by actions that show that we will not cooperate with the investigation.

[Anchor]
On the other hand, if the arrest suit is rejected, President Yoon should be handed over to the prosecution in 10 days. There's a story like this. What kind of story is this?

[Jeongbin Seo]
Of course, I'm referring to the time when this arrest suit was rejected and an arrest warrant was requested by the Senior Civil Servant Corruption Investigations Unit and cited. If that happens, the period can be extended to up to 20 days, but the prosecution can conduct additional investigations during those 10 days by using only 10 days for investigation by the Senior Civil Servant Corruption Investigations Unit and handing over the remaining 10 days to the prosecution for prosecution.

In fact, if you think about whether President Yoon will make such a statement afterwards, I think it is most likely that he will not make a statement as it is. In the end, since the Senior Civil Servant Corruption Investigations Unit claims that it has no right to investigate from the beginning of this investigation, even if the case eventually passes to the prosecution for prosecution or prosecution, this part is not resolved, and if so, there is a high possibility that they will still refuse to make a statement.

On the other hand, if the prosecution now intends to conduct a practical investigation to file a prosecution, I think President Yoon will be able to argue that the prosecution also has no right to investigate. Considering these points, I think that they will still exercise their right to refuse to make statements.

[Anchor]
You don't think there will be much change even if it is handed over to the prosecution later, right? I see. Then, we will know only when the results of the arrest suit come out, but if it is dismissed and the Senior Civil Servant Corruption Investigations Unit requests an arrest warrant, when will it be? Do you want me to do it right away?

[Reporter]
It is expected to vary depending on the results of the arrest suit. Once you have decided to dismiss or cite it, the documents sent by the court must arrive at the Senior Civil Servant Corruption Investigations Unit. That way, the suspended investigation time, the 48-hour time, starts again. For this reason, it seems that the Senior Civil Servant Corruption Investigations Unit will decide whether to request a warrant or not after the results come out.

Initially, it was predicted that the Senior Civil Servant Corruption Investigations Unit could seek an arrest warrant for President Yoon Suk Yeol as early as today. However, as he said he does not usually request a warrant when the arrest suit is in progress, he is expected to decide whether to claim it or not after looking at the results. First of all, President Yoon Suk Yeol is not cooperating with the investigation while exercising his right to refuse to make statements.

Even if this result comes out, there is a high possibility that they will not cooperate with the investigation. As a result, you may think that this investigation is ineffective. Then, there is a possibility that the Senior Civil Servant Corruption Investigations Unit will seek a warrant as soon as the court decides.

[Anchor]
In other words, President Yoon is the first incumbent president to be detained in a detention center. As a result, there is a lot of talk about security issues and their positions are different, but President Yoon's side said that the entire detention center should be designated as a security zone in consideration of the current presidential status, but the presidential security service could not be included in it. I didn't make it to the detention center, how do I look at this from a legal perspective?

[Jeongbin Seo]
First of all, according to the Presidential Security Act, the chief of security can designate a security zone if it is deemed necessary to carry out security. However, the area should be limited to the minimum range. Considering the minimum range, I understand that the Seoul Detention Center now has more than 3,000 people.

Therefore, if the entire Seoul Detention Center is designated as a security zone, there are more than 3,000 prisoners in the situation, and we have no choice but to question whether this will be effective or feasible. That's why I think that if I consider these arguments, the possibility of reality is actually very low.

[Anchor]
And today, the second day of the impeachment trial was held at the Constitutional Court. Earlier, President Yoon applied for a change in the date, but it was not accepted, right?

[Reporter]
That's right. The Constitutional Public Information Officer briefed today. As a result of the discussion, we decided not to accept the request for a change of the date. All the judges attended and talked about the results of the discussion. So the justices don't think it's a reason to change the date. First of all, President Yoon Suk Yeol submitted an application to the Constitutional Court to postpone the hearing date after his arrest yesterday.

This is because if the deadline proceeds while in custody, the right to attend the trial is not guaranteed. President Yoon Suk Yeol has not directly expressed his intention to attend today's hearing to the Constitutional Court. Even if they do not attend the second hearing, they can attend the upcoming hearing, but the Constitutional Court does not seem to have specifically considered that it violated the rights of President Yoon Suk Yeol.

However, the Constitutional Court also said it would continue to hear the power dispute trial filed by President Yoon Suk Yeol against the second request and issuance of arrest warrants.

[Anchor]
But is there no problem if I don't continue to attend the impeachment hearing date like this?

[Jeongbin Seo]
Actually, it's not a big problem. Once you don't attend on the first hearing date, you can't present your hearing, but you can proceed with the trial even if you don't attend after that. Of course, it may be meaningful in terms of content for the parties to attend and argue their specific positions, but since President Yoon's delegation is actually making a lot of claims, I think there will be no significant difference in the hearing process or conclusion even if President Yoon does not attend.

[Anchor]
You're saying it's not disadvantageous even if you don't attend, right?

[Jeongbin Seo]
That's right. In fact, I understand that former President Park Geun Hye or former President Roh Moo Hyun did not actually attend the impeachment trial. So even in light of that, there is a possibility that he will not be present because it is certainly not an honorable position, and it will not affect him that much.

[Anchor]
On the other hand, lawyers included in the president's delegation joined lawyer Cho Dae-hyun, who served as a constitutional judge during the Roh Moo Hyun administration, and lawyer Jung Sang-myung, who served as the prosecutor general. You didn't join because you thought you had a chance of winning?

[Jeongbin Seo]
In fact, it's something I really don't know about. From a lawyer's point of view, there may be cases in which some cases are considered to have a high chance of winning, and in others, even if the odds are low, there may be cases in which this should be argued. In the case of these two, it is not clear exactly which position they are in, but considering their past experiences, lawyers who served as constitutional judges and attorneys who served as prosecutors, they would not have thought that there was no possibility of winning without controversy.

Therefore, in the end, I think it is possible to predict that he joined the impeachment trial after seeing that there is a certain possibility that the claim will be dismissed.

[Anchor]
For President Yoon, a re-decision on the impeachment bill is unconstitutional. What part did you point out when you claimed that if you take out the crime of rebellion, the quorum will collapse?

[Jeongbin Seo]
I think we're in a situation where we're competing for procedural or content parts. First of all, regarding the argument for a re-decision on the impeachment bill, isn't it a violation of the principle of prohibiting double jeopardy in the end? During the same session, it seems to point out these procedural issues, and on the other hand, the argument that the quorum will collapse if the crime of rebellion is excluded also seems to point out these procedural issues whether or not the claim of rebellion can be removed from the impeachment motion.

However, even if these parts are not considered procedural flaws, these issues can eventually lead to claims that the impeachment itself is wrong in terms of content, so it can be seen that both procedural and substantive parts are argued.

[Anchor]
President Yoon has been arrested, but he is now waiting for the results of an arrest suit, but the impeachment trial continues. How can we anticipate the future procedures and duration?

[Reporter]
As you said, we are speeding up the impeachment trial. The Constitutional Court has set a hearing date five times in advance, followed by three more today. It was supposed to be held all day from 10 a.m. on the 6th, 11th, and 13th of next month. It is a trial schedule twice a week as before.

If you look at the impeachment trial, if you look at the past impeachment trial, former President Roh Moo Hyun's impeachment trial ended on the 7th day. Then it took 63 days. And the case of former President Park Geun Hye continued to the 17th hearing and took about 91 days.

The Constitutional Court continues to state that the pace of President Yoon Suk Yeol's impeachment trial is not fast in light of precedent. In the legal profession, judges Moon Hyung-bae and Lee Mi-sun will end their terms on April 18. Before that, there are many observations that the final conclusion of the impeachment trial will be made. However, the Constitutional Court is expected to carefully decide the timing according to the results of the Constitutional Court's hearing and the situation, as there are also disputes in the political circle.

[Anchor]
And today, the first trial of former Defense Minister Kim Yong-hyun, who prayed for martial law, was held. It is said that the trial preparation date is usually not obligated to attend the defendant, but it came out in person. Is it unusual?

[Jeongbin Seo]
In fact, it is a little difficult to determine whether this is unusual or common because I haven't seen statistical data, but as you said, unlike general criminal trial procedures, prosecutors and lawyers must attend, and in principle, the defendant's attendance is left to his or her own will.

Therefore, it is a procedure in which the defendant does not have to attend because it is a process of preparing for future hearings. Nevertheless, the fact that he attended even though he was not a lawyer or a legal profession means that direct participation in this preparation process will eventually affect the conclusion of the trial.

[Anchor]
Former Defense Minister Kim Yong-hyun said, "Declaration of emergency martial law is the president's exclusive authority and is not subject to judicial review. It does not make sense to judge whether the prosecutor is right or wrong about the president's constitutional authority and political judgment. I raised my voice like this, but this is probably the story of the governing act that President Yoon usually insisted on, right?

[Reporter]
That's right. First of all, former Defense Minister Kim Yong-hyun is the first person to be put on trial in custody in connection with the emergency martial law incident. As the lawyer said earlier on today's trial preparation date, it is time to organize the positions of both the defendant and the prosecution before the full-fledged hearing. However, former Minister Kim's side had a fierce battle with the prosecution at the first trial. Former Minister Kim's argument is this.

I talked about whether the prosecutor could speak and judge the president's constitutional rights. And he argued that the declaration of emergency martial law is the president's own authority and is not subject to judicial review. He also pointed out that if the judiciary judges the president's political actions, it could result in prosecutors and judges engaging in political actions.

Accordingly, the prosecution has already recognized the prosecutor's authority to open an investigation during the investigation stage and the arrest examination process. That is why this part is unacceptable. That's what I said. In addition, since accomplices are also investigating, there is no question of the authority or progress of the investigation in this case, and there was a fierce battle.

[Anchor]
The court proposed an intensive hearing about three times every two weeks. However, former Minister Kim opposed it as a violation of defense rights. What is this about?

[Jeongbin Seo]
Of course, as this argument claims, there can actually be problems with the right to defend. First of all, given the number of charges related to civil war that the charges themselves are too serious, you may need more time to prepare more thoroughly. So I think there might be some truth to the argument that there's actually a problem with the right to defend, and on the other hand, these things might eventually be part of a plan to prolong the trial a little bit.

Considering the situation so far, the movement of public opinion is also showing a large fluctuation, and if so, former Minister Kim may think that such public opinion may eventually affect the progress of the trial or the conclusion. So, on the other hand, there may be a change in public opinion through the progress of the criminal case against President Yoon and the process of the impeachment trial, which could affect his trial to some extent in the end. I think that there is also a plan to prolong the trial with this judgment.

[Anchor]
I see. That's all for today's talk. So far, we've been with reporter Baek Jong-gyu and lawyer Seo Jeong-bin. Thank you both for today.