Yoon appeared in person for questioning of the suspect before his arrest...What's the court's decision?

■ Host: Lee Yeo-jin, anchor Jung Chae-woon, anchor
■ Starring: 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]
It is the first time in constitutional history that an incumbent president has attended a warrant review.

Let's point out the main issues of the substantive examination of the arrest warrant. This time, let's talk with lawyer Seo Jeong-bin. Please come in.

Something unprecedented is happening in constitutional history. President Yoon left the Seoul Detention Center at around 1:25 and arrived at the court at around 1:54. Earlier, when I went to the Seoul Detention Center, I got in a security car, but when I came to the court this time, I got in a convoy.

[Jeongbin Seo]
That's right. Since I am an incumbent president, I think that during this transfer process, there was continuous discussion on whether to move under the leadership of the security agency or under the jurisdiction of the Ministry of Justice. Therefore, this time, it seems that when moving from the detention center to the court in principle, the officials of the Ministry of Justice boarded the convoy and transferred it, and instead, the security officials protecting the president moved around the vehicle while carrying out the convoy.

[Anchor]
Since it's unprecedented, it's never happened before, so whether you ride a security vehicle or a convoy is a part that is very much focused on right now. Will the president finally express his position when he arrives at the Western District Court? There was even a photo line installed. However, this part drew attention as to whether to express its position, but in the end, it moved directly to the underground parking lot. There was no separate statement of position, so where is the reason?

[Jeongbin Seo]
From the beginning, I expected that I would not appear in court today, but when I suddenly moved, I wondered what kind of position I would express in front of the public, but in the end, as you said, I went straight into the courtroom. So, when I think about it, I think the biggest problem may have been security concerns. In fact, there are quite a few supporters protesting in front of the Western District Court, so if the president announces something himself in such an external environment, there may be such concerns. Therefore, I think that the schedule was set in such a hurry that the court first entered the court without expressing its position due to security issues and safety issues.

[Anchor]
President Yoon said he would not attend until yesterday, but only this morning did he change his position, so how should we interpret the change in his position to attend? What's the reason?

[Jeongbin Seo]
In fact, one of the reasons why I expected that I would not attend this time was that President Yoon's side has insisted that there is no jurisdiction over the warrant of the Western District Court, so I thought that I would not attend the Western District Court and receive a warrant review at a time when I continue to make such consistent claims. If that happens, it seems to be quite contrary to the previous arguments, so I thought that. In the end, the fact that he was present means that he finally made this judgment about whether it would be advantageous for President Yoon to attend at least a little at a time when he is determined whether he is arrested or not. In addition to this, since he has never appeared directly in front of the public so far, he has not appeared in court this time, of course, but I think it includes his intention to send a message to his supporters by showing the process of attending.

[Anchor]
President Yoon continues to refuse, but he did not respond to the investigation by the Senior Civil Servant Corruption Investigations Unit and did not appear at the Seoul Central District Court earlier, but he attended the Western District Court's actual examination of the arrest warrant today. Did this judgment work that there will be a disadvantage if something is not present? What do you think?

[Jeongbin Seo]
I think that could be the case. It is true that it is more advantageous for the suspect to attend in the case of a normal warrant examination, and it is true that if he does not attend, he or she is more likely to be issued an arrest warrant because he or she cannot exercise sufficient defense rights. In this case, even if they do not attend, they have already raised various issues from outside the court and the lawyers were expected to defend them in the actual examination, so I thought there would be no particular disadvantages even if they do not attend, but for President Yoon, I think it would be more advantageous for him to attend and explain the situations of the emergency martial law situation than to plead his position through his agents.

[Anchor]
Attention is also paid to the judge in charge, but he said that the judge on duty took over because it was the weekend.

[Jeongbin Seo]
That's right. There are now two judges in charge of warrants in the Western District Court, and judges Lee Soon-hyung and Shin Han-mi will be in charge of cases related to warrants. And there is a precedent that each issued the first and second arrest warrants for President Yoon last time. Originally, in the case of a substantive examination of arrest warrants, it is correct that these two judges in charge of warrants are in charge of conducting the examination, but outside working hours or on weekends, the judge on duty will conduct the examination related to the warrant. Therefore, since the warrant review is on Saturday this time, Judge Cha Eun-kyung, a judge on duty, is proceeding with the case.

[Anchor]
Since it is a warrant examination for the president, there was a prospect that the Western District Court would assign another judge, but you're just doing what you've usually done, right?

[Jeongbin Seo]
That's right. Of course, considering the importance of the matter, the judge in charge could have been designated differently, but as you said, the judge in charge of the duty was in charge of the day, as in general cases, and according to the report now, Judge Cha is also somewhat competent, and he is a fairly senior judge, so there must have been a judgment that it is not too difficult to proceed with the examination.

[Anchor]
Was there a judgment that doing this might not cause unnecessary misunderstanding?

[Jeongbin Seo]
I think that could be the case. Depending on how the conclusion comes out when another judge is designated other than a judge on duty, it seems that the opposition party can raise criticism that there has been a change because the court cared about these things. Therefore, I think there are aspects that were carried out in accordance with the principle procedure.

[Anchor]
What is the screening process?

[Jeongbin Seo]
First of all, since many prosecutors from the Senior Civil Servant Corruption Investigations Unit are also present, it is expected that the prosecutors will first fully explain the reasons for requesting a warrant and why the warrant should be issued. In this regard, President Yoon's lawyer and President Yoon himself will make such arguments and statements that the warrant should not be issued. These battles will come and go to each other, and the judge will hear these in the middle or look at the records that have already been submitted and ask both sides questions and hear answers if they need anything. After hours of these processes and closing statements, the hearing ends for now. After that, after a considerable amount of time, the judge decides whether to issue a warrant or not.

[Anchor]
In the warrant review, as we can see in the general trial, is it an atmosphere in which the battle between the Senior Civil Servant Corruption Investigations Unit and the President can go back and forth?

[Jeongbin Seo]
In fact, it's quite difficult to compare with normal events. In ordinary cases, it is not very common for prosecutors to appear in the warrant review. The evidence has already been submitted, and the judge can see it and make a judgment for now, and instead, the party and the suspect attend and plead. Therefore, it is difficult to see situations in which disputes come and go in general situations, and if necessary, the judge looks at the evidence record and asks the suspect. However, in the case of a very important case such as this case, the prosecutor who conducted the investigation of this case may come out and state the prosecutor's opinion.

[Anchor]
But now the president continues to point out the jurisdiction issue. However, the Senior Civil Servant Corruption Investigations Unit requested a warrant from the Seoul Western District Court based on custom, but will these debates continue during the review process?

[Jeongbin Seo]
Those debates are expected to continue. In particular, I don't think the jurisdiction issue right now is an argument that can be turned or withdrawn in the middle, especially from President Yoon's point of view. Because from now on, I'm going to point out the jurisdiction issue and argue that there's illegality in all the warrants issued in the breach of jurisdiction, the subsequent arrest process, the evidence collected after the arrest and the related data. Therefore, even though he has attended the Western District Court, I think he will nevertheless argue about the jurisdiction of the Western District Court, large or small.

[Anchor]
The president seems to be in a bit of a dilemma, because the president applied to the Central District Court earlier in the case of arrest suit, so this is a part of attention, but it was eventually dismissed. Then, I think it would be a little unreasonable to continue to raise the jurisdiction issue. What do you think?

[Jeongbin Seo]
Of course, external observations have concluded to some extent because even the Central District Court dismissed the legality of this arrest, believing that there was no particular problem. That's why I think it's a little difficult to make a contradictory argument. However, as I said, I don't think it's a matter that President Yoon can easily give up on this part. Therefore, even after the fact was dismissed, the jurisdiction issue has continued to be argued, and this part seems to be something that will be argued in a formal trial in the future. Of course, the Central District Court has reached its primary conclusion once, but in fact, it seems to be in a dilemma that seems somewhat contradictory because it is not a final judgment and clearly a matter for judges to weigh it and think about in the main trial, but this argument is still expected to continue.

[Anchor]
But if we continue to make these claims, I don't think the judiciary will see it in favor of President Yoon, what do you think?

[Jeongbin Seo]
First of all, even within the judiciary, some judges expressed their differences on whether they had jurisdiction over the Senior Civil Servant Corruption Investigations Unit. In that sense, I think there may be some disagreement on the legality of the warrant issued by the Western District Court, and if so, isn't this a matter to be reviewed legally to some extent in the future? If so, it is hard to think that these arguments will immediately work against President Yoon, but if these arguments continue to be repeated, they can have a disadvantageous effect in the end. In the end, some issues can be seen as actively raising questions about the court's judgment in succession and eventually showing considerable distrust of the judicial order, so I think this will not be judged in favor at least and may affect it somewhat unfavorably.

[Anchor]
If you look at the arrest warrant requested by the Senior Civil Servant Corruption Investigations Unit, what are the main charges of President Yoon? Please explain it to me.

[Seo Jung-bin]
For the main charges, there is such a charge of abuse of authority that orders police or military personnel without meeting the requirements for declaring martial law on December 3rd, that is, abusing their authority to occupy the National Assembly or the National Election Commission, and this is immediately a charge of rebellion for the purpose of national constitution. At the same time, the charge of rebellion is included.

[Anchor]
As the Senior Civil Servant Corruption Investigations Unit requests an arrest warrant, the bill is said to be about 150 pages long, and what stands out here is the typical conviction. In what legal case is a conviction criminal?

[Jeongbin Seo]
Convinced criminals are, in the end, usually, those who commit crimes when they occur are wrong, or illegal, and they end up committing crimes even though they know that they constitute crimes. Compared to this, a person who proceeds to the crime with confidence that this is not a crime itself and is justified is said to be a sure offender. In the case of such people, they have no choice but to judge that there are more risk factors than usual in determining sentencing later. Therefore, the story of a certain criminal can be seen as an emphasis on the fact that President Yoon committed the crime knowing that there was a legal problem or that it could be a problem. It is not that he does not even think about it at all, but that these are situations in which problems arose against a firm will that is legal and legitimate.

[Anchor]
And among the contents of the arrest warrant, according to the official of the Senior Civil Servant Corruption Investigations Unit, the purpose of the risk of recidivism is included. There are also talks about that, so what should we interpret the risk of recidivism that the Senior Civil Servant Corruption Investigations Unit claims?

[Jeongbin Seo]
The main reasons for the court's judgment when requesting an arrest warrant are whether criminal charges are recognized as reasonable, and whether there is a fear of escape or destruction of evidence. The reason for mentioning and writing this risk of recidivism now seems to have been written for almost the same purpose as the previously mentioned conviction. Since there is such a suspicion that there is no recognition of illegality and that it is justified, it can cause such problems as martial law again because if he is released, he is a certain criminal. So, it emphasizes that second and third extreme measures can be carried out, and that is why an arrest warrant should be issued.

[Anchor]
And there was also the destruction of evidence, and the reason for the destruction of evidence was that he changed his cell phone before and after the emergency martial law and the messenger program, because he left Telegram.

[Jeongbin Seo]
That's right. Concerns over the destruction of evidence are also very important in relation to whether or not an arrest warrant is issued in the end, so this part was specifically indicated. So, as you said, before this incident, I changed my cell phone, deleted Telegram, or left. In the end, because of this precedent, if you are tried without arrest in the future or if you are investigated and tried, there is a high risk of destroying evidence in the future because there has been such an act of destroying evidence. It appears to be written like this.

[Anchor]
The screen you're looking at shows the president moving from the Seoul Detention Center in Uiwang City to the Western District Court once again. Currently, the protest rallies of the president's supporters continue in front of the Western District Court, and the police are controlling it in preparation for any possible situation. There are also several car walls built. Numerous police forces have been mobilized to control the scene. I think the Senior Civil Servant Corruption Investigations Unit is also a very important moment for the actual examination of the arrest warrant today. So, today's result is whether an arrest warrant is issued or dismissed. To expand it broadly, there are also comments that the fate of the Senior Civil Servant Corruption Investigations Unit depends on it, but from the standpoint of the Senior Civil Servant Corruption Investigations Unit, it's a very worrisome part, right?

[Jeongbin Seo]
That's right. It's a situation where we have to pay considerable attention. First of all, the issuance and execution of arrest warrants were important, but it is more important to issue an arrest warrant that enforces the person concerned. If the request for an arrest warrant is dismissed, it may be evaluated that the investigation into the Senior Civil Servant Corruption Investigations Unit has not been sufficiently conducted to prove the allegations against the president. If so, the investigation process so far is bound to be quite sensitive because the problems of lack of investigative ability can be pointed out. On the other hand, when the request for an arrest warrant is rejected, considerable difficulties can be expected in conducting future investigations. As I said, it is also possible to evaluate that the investigation so far has not been sufficiently conducted. In the future, if so, there will be considerable questions about how the Senior Civil Servant Corruption Investigations Unit can proceed with the investigation when the president is in custody. Therefore, the Senior Civil Servant Corruption Investigations Unit is paying attention to the issuance of an arrest warrant at this stage, especially to the whole organization's life and death.

[Anchor]
It would not be an exaggeration to say that not only the Senior Civil Servant Corruption Investigations Unit but also the president's fate depends on it. So what do the two sides highlight each other? [Seo Jung-bin] The most important part now is to what extent the criminal charges eventually became a calling, and I think this will be the most important issue. Of course, other concerns about escape and destruction of evidence are also very important criteria in issuing arrest warrants, but at least in this case, to what extent did crime become a vindication? This seems to be the most important issue. Because when considering the seriousness of the crime, it is the most serious crime that stipulates the most serious punishment compared to other crimes. Therefore, if the court says that the charge of rebellion has been clarified to some extent, it is immediately possible to judge that there is a risk of destroying evidence or fleeing. Therefore, I think that in the end, the Senior Civil Servant Corruption Investigations Unit or President Yoon's side will have a considerable battle with each other about how much evidence has been made.

[Anchor]
The time is heading toward 3:19 p.m., and it has been more than an hour since the actual examination of the arrest warrant began. Earlier, the president arrived at the Western District Court at around 1:54. There was news that the review began a little over 2 o'clock when the warrant was scheduled, and the Senior Civil Servant Corruption Investigations Unit made an arrest, but it seems that they were not able to make good use of the 48 hours given after the arrest. Because the president's side has repeatedly refused to investigate, so there's no arrest warrant, no problem, requested without sufficient investigation?

[Jeongbin Seo]
I think this is a situation that the Senior Civil Servant Corruption Investigations Unit expected to some extent. He has already made it clear that he will exercise his right to refuse to make a statement even if he is arrested, even if he is present through his agents. That's why I think I was making my expectations clear. If the suspect refuses to make a statement even if he or she appears, or if he or she does not attend at the detention center, it cannot be considered an insufficient investigation in itself. From the perspective of the Senior Civil Servant Corruption Investigations Unit, it can be seen that they have collected a lot of such evidence that can prove criminal charges without President Yoon's statement, so even if there is no statement, it will not be too difficult to request an arrest warrant if they fully organize such evidence and claim it according to the reason for arrest. I would have judged it and proceeded with it. Even if you look at the contents of the arrest warrant request, it is quite a large amount of such an arrest warrant request that it is already said to be over 150 pages. If you think about the evidence, I saw the scene yesterday.Ma believes that a lot of evidence records have been secured to some extent when he sees several boxes in it. Therefore, although there was no direct statement from President Yoon, I don't think it will matter much whether he made a statement or not because he requested a warrant because he believed that he could fully explain it through other evidence.

[Anchor]
President Yoon Suk Yeol, it is said that he has been silent since his arrest, so in this case, how does this usually apply to the issuance of an arrest warrant?

[Jeongbin Seo]
If you think about it, it can work against you. Of course, this basically depends on the extent to which other evidence has been obtained. For example, if objective and clear evidence has been obtained enough to prove these charges without making a statement, this attitude of refusing to attend and refusing to make a statement completely is ultimately uncooperative to the investigation. It is evaluated as such an uncooperative attitude that does not reveal the truth despite the circumstances in which the allegations are admitted clearly or objectively, and the possibility of an arrest warrant being cited increases little by little. However, such objective evidence is insufficient to prove it. If so, the exercise of the right to refuse to make a statement is a legitimate means of defense that can be exercised as a suspect, so this alone is not adversely affected. So the key point is how much evidence is collected in the end, and I think this will be the most important part.

[Anchor]
How long will it take to examine the actuality of the arrest warrant today? It's been over an hour.

[Jeongbin Seo]
It's not easy to predict. Usually, the actual examination of arrest warrants often ends within 10 minutes. As I said, prosecutors are rarely present, and the judge checks the records and asks only the necessary questions and answers, so it doesn't take long.

[Anchor]
That's why it's unusual today. The prosecutor of the Senior Civil Servant Corruption Investigations Unit said six people attended, and the president said eight lawyers attended, but this itself is very unusual, right?

[Jeongbin Seo]
That's right. If you compare it to normal events, you can say it's quite unusual. However, for politically sensitive cases or cases against key figures, the prosecutor takes considerable manpower and takes a considerable amount of time. Therefore, it is difficult to say that it is particularly unusual compared to special cases. So, it may not be meaningful to predict the time, but for now, there's no way it'll be done in 10 minutes. For example, I remember that it took about two or three hours in the last application, but if so, in this case, I expect that the hearing itself will be over within about five hours.

[Anchor]
In the case of the President, we are cautious about the fear of running away from the criminal procedure law and the fear of destroying evidence. In this case, which one should we look at more importantly?

[Jeongbin Seo]
As you said, people in such a socially well-known position are often judged to have no real fear of running away. It is also true that the president, especially now, has been staying in his official residence, and even if he is released, he is expected to stay in his official residence, so if you look at the fear of running away, the concern is very low. However, when judging these reasons, the court does not judge just by looking at the concerns of escape and the destruction of evidence. In judging these reasons, for example, if there is such concern about harming the officials. Or, if there is a concern of recidivism, or if the crime is so serious that strong punishment is expected when the trial is conducted in the future. If so, it is judged that there is a fear of running away to that part, or that there is a motive to destroy evidence. Therefore, if you look at the status of the president itself and the concern of running away, this part is clearly low, but considering other circumstances, you will not judge it based on this part alone, but based on existing claims and evidence, you will fully consider and judge whether such concerns can arise if they proceed without detention in the future.

[Anchor]
In the case of destruction of evidence, even if there is no fear of destruction of evidence in the future, evidence that is already expected to be destroyed, how will this be applied?

[Jeongbin Seo]
If you say that you have already destroyed evidence in the past, you will not judge your concerns in itself, but in the end, the fact that you were concerned about the destruction of evidence in the past is likely to continue. Of course, the president is arguing that there is no particular fear of destroying evidence as there has already been a considerable investigation, and these arguments are often made in general cases. Since the investigation has progressed considerably, we have nothing to destroy any more evidence, but the problem now is that there are not only the president but also a number of officials who are being investigated and tried in connection with the alleged rebellion. If so, there is a clear possibility that President Yoon will be able to communicate about the future situation and reverse or adjust statements in the future, even through his agents, even if he cannot direct something. Therefore, even if there is no more material evidence that can be destroyed, it can be judged that there are such concerns about personal evidence that can affect the president's position.

[Anchor]
President Yoon Suk Yeol will continue his appearance on the warrant review. The examination is continuing, but how long will it usually take until the result of the arrest warrant examination is over?

[Jeongbin Seo]
Usually, if there is a substantive examination at around 2 p.m., it will be completed quickly and the conclusion will be made by the evening or at least that night. So in the case of the current screening, we need to see how long it will continue. Some expect that the issue will be decided as early as late as tonight, but given the importance of the issue or the vast contents of the record, it is expected that the results will come out only after early morning.

[Anchor]
There are many observations regarding the results, but if the arrest warrant is dismissed today, the Senior Civil Servant Corruption Investigations Unit should conduct an investigation without detention, but the president is still not responding to the investigation, so if he is arrested without detention, it will be difficult to directly investigate President Yoon, shouldn't we look at it like this?

[Jeongbin Seo]
That's right. In fact, even if you are arrested, you can naturally think that a direct investigation will be difficult even in a non-confinement state because it is expected that there will be no direct statement itself. The bigger problem is that the evidence that has been prepared so far is somewhat insufficient to prove the allegations that the arrest warrant was eventually dismissed. If so, the Senior Civil Servant Corruption Investigations Unit has no choice but to consider how to investigate and collect additional evidence or data in the future because it is impossible to directly investigate President Yoon Suk Yeol and the investigation processes that have been conducted so far are still insufficient. Then, the overall flow of the investigation will inevitably be delayed considerably. Therefore, if the dismissal is decided, it is expected that the Senior Civil Servant Corruption Investigations Unit will eventually have considerable difficulty in proceeding with the investigation.

[Anchor]
How would it affect prosecution's prosecution and maintenance of prosecution if it was dismissed?

[Jeongbin Seo]
Likewise, from the prosecution's point of view, sufficient evidence must be collected to prosecute, but if it is dismissed, it will be judged that such evidence needs to be collected. So, I think that after receiving the records from the Senior Civil Servant Corruption Investigations Unit, we will find out where the arrest warrant was dismissed based on this and focus on collecting additional evidence to supplement these areas.

[Anchor]
Now, supporters are flocking to the main gate of the Western District Court. We continue to show police control around the Western District Court. There is also news that supportive protesters are surrounding the court. Will President Yoon deliver a message in front of his supporters today? Or whether to deliver a message in front of the photo line. This is something I was interested in, but supporters continue to express their support by moving to detention centers and Western District Court, messages from the president, statements, and messages were posted on SNS yesterday. These things must have had an impact, right? What do you think?

[Jeongbin Seo]
I think so. In the end, I think one of the reasons for today's attendance was to convey this message through attendance. So I think it's a situation where more supporters gathered than usual after watching the president's situation and receiving messages. In the end, I think even these parts can have some significant impact on future criminal trials or impeachment trials. Of course, judges will have to judge according to law and conscience, but they will do so, but at least in this case now, it seems that not only legal matters but also clearly such public opinion aspects can work. In particular, in the case of an impeachment trial, there are many views that the judgment of the Constitutional Court itself has a political character. Therefore, it seems that these gatherings of supporters and these actions can have a little effect on future trials. If so, I think President Yoon will continue to deliver messages to his supporters in various ways in the future.

[Anchor]
At the same time, supporters intensified, and threats were posted on the Internet against the judge who rejected President Yoon's request for an investigation into the arrest of President Yoon. The police launched an investigation. If I post something like this, I'm subject to punishment, right?

[Jeongbin Seo]
You will be subject to punishment. First of all, it seems that the police are investigating because it constitutes a crime of intimidation. In particular, complaining about the judiciary's judgment now and predicting a kind of terrorist act against the judge in charge is bound to be considerably worse than the general crime of intimidation. In the end, it seems that it is a matter that can be sentenced to a considerable amount of heavy punishment because it is a threat that can cause danger to the judicial order.

[Anchor]
You're watching Mapo-daero in front of the Western District Court right now. Supporters seem to be invading lanes beyond the car wall, and I think Mapo-daero will be dangerous because it is an area with a lot of traffic. As the police force continues to be deployed, we are controlling the scene, and I hope that there will be no more than expected. The president continues to raise questions about the Western District Court. I'm raising a jurisdiction issue. What would happen to the prosecution issue if an arrest warrant was issued?

[Jeongbin Seo]
Regarding the prosecution, an official from the Senior Civil Servant Corruption Investigations Unit said that it is difficult to determine how to prosecute the case because the Senior Civil Servant Corruption Investigations Unit has the right to prosecute. However, given the situation so far, it is expected that the prosecution will eventually prosecute the prosecution to the Central District Court. The part that is controversial now is, what is the jurisdiction of the warrant request, whether this is the central or western law. It was a matter of requesting a warrant. This has been controversial because it is not explicitly stipulated by the Public Offices Act, but in the case of prosecution, the principle is clearly defined. Therefore, in principle, the case handled by the Senior Civil Servant Corruption Investigations Unit is to be prosecuted to the Seoul Central District Court, so I think the prosecution who took over the case will eventually prosecute it to the Central District Court according to this principle.

[Anchor]
If a warrant is issued, an investigation can be conducted for 20 days, so how can I see the schedule at this time?

[Jeongbin Seo]
According to the story so far, up to 20 days are spent at the Senior Civil Servant Corruption Investigations Unit for 10 days, and the prosecution uses 10 days for investigation. Of course, this part is a consultation matter, so the schedule may change depending on the change of the situation, but first of all, based on this, the Senior Civil Servant Corruption Investigations Unit will investigate additionally for 10 days during the prosecution period. For example, additional raids can be carried out, and this way, it seems that the evidence will be reinforced a little more. If the prosecution takes over the case about 10 days later, the prosecution can proceed with the investigation by looking at whether there are legal issues or facts that need to be sorted out based on the evidence created by the Senior Civil Servant Corruption Investigations Unit, and in some cases, whether there is a need to conduct a direct investigation. And then proceedings leading to prosecution are expected.

[Anchor]
If an arrest warrant is issued today, the president will of course apply for an arrest suit just as he has previously applied for an arrest suit, right? What do you expect?

[Jeongbin Seo]
Looking at it so far, I think it will eventually claim a binding pride. If it is dismissed in the warrant review and no special changes occur, the expectation is very low even if an arrest suit is requested later. Although it is highly unlikely to be cited, Yoon's side has so far used all legally permitted illegal procedures. When I see this, I think that regardless of the possibility of expectation, I will also ask for a binding appeal, and on the other hand, as if I attended today, I think I will pay attention to the public opinion that can be gained by appearing in court with my supporters. If so, I think I will eventually file a claim for legality.

[Anchor]
Does the Western District Court review the arresting pride?

[Jeongbin Seo]
It can be a question of where to claim binding complaints. First of all, since he was present today, President Yoon may ask the Western District Court for an arrest suit this time, but that does not mean that he has consistently argued about the jurisdiction of the court and withdrew this part. Today's substantive examination is expected to argue that, and if so, I think we will eventually ask the Central District Court for a binding appeal once again.

[Anchor]
He expressed his opinion that he would file a claim with the Central District Court. If the warrant is issued, will the president continue to stay in the Seoul Detention Center where he was before?

[Jeongbin Seo]
Unless there are special circumstances, the detention site is still expected to be designated as a Seoul detention center. Internally, there may be movement. Currently, he is staying in the waiting room for a suspect, but if an arrest warrant is issued, he will have to stay in a separate detention center after that, but in the past, he will be held in a solitary cell of about 3 pyeong.

[Anchor]
Now, President Yoon says he continues to refuse to make statements, so what if he gets arrested? How can I investigate if I continue to refuse a statement?

[Jeongbin Seo]
In the end, I think we have no choice but to continue to check and secure additional evidence other than statements. It's true that statements are really one of the most important pieces of evidence in criminal trials or in the course of investigations. However, since we cannot expect the president's statement, we have no choice but to collect other evidence. Of course, even if there is no such statement, I think there is a good chance that evidence to prove the allegations will be secured and that it has already been secured. Therefore, I think the Senior Civil Servant Corruption Investigations Unit will check the collected evidence once again and review more data that can be reinforced regardless of attendance or statement.

[Anchor]
What do you think about forced recruitment? In any case, there is an opinion that compulsory arrest is possible because he was arrested for investigation and investigation. What do you think of this?

[Jeongbin Seo]
In practice, it is said that if a arrested suspect is staying in a detention center while refusing to attend, sometimes an arrest warrant is issued separately and forced to be arrested by an investigative agency. Of course, it's legally possible, but I think it's difficult to actually implement this part. Even if President Yoon becomes a forced recruit, it seems that it is not necessary to request such an arrest warrant again when it is clear that he will refuse to make a statement, and on the other hand, if that happens, some could be criticized again for excessive investigation of the president or show-off investigation, so it seems to be a useless process. It's hard to think that it will proceed with such criticism.

[Anchor]
So what happens if the warrant is rejected on the contrary? Are you going to the official residence right away?

[Jeongbin Seo]
If the warrant is rejected, it can be said that it goes to the official residence immediately. Of course, you can go to the detention center and clean up and come out, but if you want, you can go to your residence right away and see the results now, but anyway, I will come out of the detention center as soon as possible.

[Anchor]
In the National Assembly, the ruling and opposition parties continue to have a very tight debate over the special prosecution, and the opposition-led special prosecution law was passed at the plenary session yesterday. In large part, the revised Special Prosecutor Act, which accepted the ruling party's claims, has been passed, and if a special prosecutor is launched after the prosecution of President Yoon, how will the situation change?

[Jeongbin Seo]
If the special prosecution is launched and the preparation period proceeds well and begins quickly, the special prosecution will deal with the ongoing investigations into the alleged rebellion of the subject of the investigation. Therefore, if the investigation into President Yoon is also underway, the case will also be carried out by the special prosecutor. However, the prosecution has already filed an indictment. Alternatively, other cases prosecuted by the prosecution and cases under trial must be transferred to the special prosecutor. This is not the regulation, but if the special prosecutor deems it necessary, he can request a transfer and proceed with it at the special prosecutor's judgment.

[Anchor]
Let's talk about the impeachment trial. The Constitutional Court added three more hearings, and the eighth hearing is on the 13th of next month. Then, can I say that the results of the impeachment trial will be released after the 13th?

[Jeongbin Seo]
There is a hearing date set so far, but I think it is likely to increase considerably. Therefore, the results of the impeachment trial may be delayed a little. Of course, the deadline will be approximately late by mid-April. At this point, there are two judges who are about to expire, so I think they will make a judgment before that. In the end, it is correct that there are few targets for impeachment, unlike other existing impeachment cases, so let's guess that we will reach a conclusion by mid- or late March.

[Anchor]
But the president continues to object to this. The Constitutional Court is speeding up too much. And shouldn't we give them time to prepare? What do you think about the possibility that the Constitutional Court will accept these objections, such as whether the right to defend will not be secured if the schedule is closely organized and carried out?

[Jeongbin Seo]
The president's argument has a point. It won't be easy to hold a trial twice a week, and it's true that the issue is so serious that it takes time to review or prepare for arguments. It is also true that it is difficult to say that it is particularly fast when comparing past impeachment proceedings. In addition, the Constitutional Court is fully expressing its intention to proceed quickly and without delay considering the seriousness of the case, especially the president's vacancy, so wouldn't the trial schedule proceed as it was before? So, I think there is a very high possibility that you will not accept various objections.

[Anchor] President Yoon and former Defense Minister Kim Yong-hyun are divided over the decree
. As President Yoon claimed that former Minister Kim copied the old one wrong, former Minister Kim did not, and President Yoon reviewed it. What do you think of this situation when you refuted it like this? [Seo Jeong-bin] I don't know if we are actually delaying each other's responsibility because the arguments of both sides were in different procedures. However, it seems clear that they are contradicting each other on important parts. If the two sides continue to make conflicting claims on this part, it will eventually become one of the important issues in each trial. Because decree No. 1 stipulates a ban on parliamentary activities, and this is inconsistent with the constitutional provisions, it is inevitably very important who finally reviewed this part. Therefore, if these arguments continue to contradict each other, it will emerge as one of the important issues in each trial.

[Anchor]
Let's stop here. So far, I've been with lawyer Seo Jeong-bin. Thank you for talking today.