Yoon's arrest examination ended in 5 hours...Get back to the detention center and wait.

■ Host: anchor Jang Won-seok, anchor Park Min-seol
■ Appearance: lawyer Lee Go-eun, lawyer Son Jeong-hye

* 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 continue to go through more details with lawyers Son Jung-hye and Lee Go-eun. Please come in. The interrogation of the suspect before the arrest began at around 2 p.m. today and continued until around 7 p.m. I filled it up for about 5 hours. How do you see it? Was it long? Or was it as usual?

{이고}In fact, in light of previous cases of presidents and major politicians, it can be said that it ended in a relatively short period of time. However, it usually takes about an hour for the general public to be interrogated as a suspect or suspect before arrest. However, when reviewing the actuality of arrest warrants for important politicians before, there were a lot of legal issues and there were a lot of disputes over the crime and facts. However, in the case of President Yoon Suk Yeol, the issue was simple because it was an issue about the time when the emergency martial law was declared on December 3, but it still took 4 hours and 50 minutes. I think it can be evaluated that it has gone through sufficient interrogation procedures.

[Anchor]
If so, can you tell me a little bit if it took longer because you are a sitting president or if it was shorter than past presidents?

[Son Jeonghye]
As you said, even if you look at the process of reviewing the warrant in the case of former President Park Geun Hye, there are 18 charges that former President Park Geun Hye received at that time. So, given that the main charges currently applied to President Yoon Suk Yeol are divided into two, I can say that the number and amount of crimes are certainly a more compressed and simple crime for President Yoon. However, even if it is a simple crime, it seems that the prosecutor and the suspect had a lot to argue with, and various opinions were expressed because it is a historical case and a national concern in examining the existence of a wife or a crime. In particular, given the conflicting opinions regarding the motivation for the emergency martial law, it can be considered that it took some time, and in particular, allowing the suspect 40 minutes can be evaluated as taking some time because the judge in charge guaranteed sufficient defense rights.

[Anchor]
It is known that President Yoon Suk Yeol spoke directly for about 40 minutes, so how much do you think this will affect today's arrest examination?

{이고}Usually, it is more appealing to judges if the suspect himself attends and makes a statement. Perhaps, since President Yoon Suk Yeol is the one who directly declared emergency martial law by discussing it with his lawyer, it may be more appealing to the judge to talk and explain himself rather than talking about why I made this declaration with the lawyer's mouth. So there are reports that President Yoon Suk Yeol talked about my legitimacy when I declared martial law for 40 minutes and why this was necessary. In addition, President Yoon Suk Yeol's lawyer raised concerns about the need for arrest, which the Airborne Division claims, that is, the risk of recidivism, and the destruction of evidence. However, it is known that he refuted this, saying that it is different from the facts.

[Anchor]
I see. As President Yoon Suk Yeol just said, we talked for about 40 minutes. President Yoon's lawyer said beforehand that he would explain the legitimacy of the emergency martial law and the non-establishment of the crime of rebellion. For 40 minutes, what logic do you think you would have talked about it yourself?

[Son Jeonghye]
Although it is not known in detail, it is estimated that it is a handwritten letter to the public before going to the Public Health and University's Senior Civil Servant Corruption Investigations Unit. I think I summarized the contents and preached to the judge for 40 minutes that the purpose was to appeal to the people by listening to the motives of declaring emergency martial law and the form of emergency martial law. The main point of the article is this. For example, because the system of the rule of law is collapsing due to opposition tyranny and fraudulent elections, emergency martial law was the president's own authority, and this emergency martial law was described as a small-scale mini-force, so the risk of martial law cannot be evaluated as a rebellion and cannot be punished because it is the president's own authority.
I wonder if he preached the legitimacy of emergency martial law with this argument, and this 40 minutes is a considerably longer time than I thought.
It's not until I talk to myself. Therefore, there is a possibility that President Yoon may have logically explained his thoughts and summary that he wanted to express since he entered the detention center, but the court in charge must have already known the contents of the president's public statement and his articles to the people through the media. In addition to this abstract opinion, did the legal opinion be expressed that the crime of rebellion is not established legally? Or does the president acknowledge specific facts in relation to it? I think the court would have looked more closely at this part.

[Anchor]
President Yoon Suk Yeol has repeatedly pointed out the issue of warrant jurisdiction, and today's arrest examination is known to have claimed this. What did he say specifically?

{이고}Yoon Suk Yeol's president continues that the Senior Civil Servant Corruption Investigations Unit has no investigative power. In particular, it is said that there is no right to investigate the rebellion and that according to the Public Offices Act, the jurisdiction of the trial should be given to the Seoul Central District Court and the Seoul Central District Court has exclusive jurisdiction, but the Public Offices claimed that the fact that they chose the Western District Court as if they were shopping for it violates the Public Offices Act and lacks the formal requirement that there is no jurisdiction itself. However, President Yoon Suk Yeol has already submitted a defense opinion and filed an objection to this part several times at the time of issuing an arrest warrant at the Western District Court. In addition, in the end, he requested the Seoul Central District Court to appeal for an arrest warrant. However, despite the conclusion that all of them were legal, it is said that they again argued that there was a problem with the jurisdiction of the trial today.

[Anchor]
I see. According to the news just before today, there were about six prosecutors attending at the Senior Civil Servant Corruption Investigations Unit. What did the Senior Civil Servant Corruption Investigations Unit especially emphasize to emphasize the need for arrest?

[Son Jeonghye]
First of all, he would have emphasized that the crime of rebellion could not be established, and he would argue that the possibility of destroying evidence is very high in light of the president's denial of the crime and his refusal to cooperate with the investigation process. In addition, the need for arrest is very significant, claiming that there is a possibility of recidivism, running away, and the possibility of destroying evidence because there is room for obstructing the execution of warrants by investigative agencies to the extent that the head of security, deputy directors, and those involved are currently being investigated for the execution of special public affairs. I think we've talked for 70 minutes. He is likely to have argued for justification for procedural matters, and he has repeatedly argued that emergency martial law is not subject to judicial review because it is the president's own authority. In this regard, there are precedents presented by the investigators of the Senior Civil Servant Corruption Investigations Unit, so even if it is a governing act, it is likely that the constitution is subject to judicial review and if martial law is enforced for the purpose of national constitution, it is possible to persuade the court about the crime of rebellion.

[Anchor]
If you look at the request for an arrest warrant for the Senior Civil Servant Corruption Investigations Unit, there is a rather noticeable expression. President Yoon is a typical conviction. What do you mean by "confident criminal"?

{이고}Now, the Senior Civil Servant Corruption Investigations Unit is talking about the need for arrest, expressing that President Yoon Suk Yeol is showing a typical conviction. The reason is that even though a certain criminal commits a crime, we call it a certain criminal who acts with confidence that it is not a crime but a legitimate act. However, if you look at why you called it that way, according to public statements and handwritten letters written after the martial law incident, the emergency martial law itself on December 3 was justified and confident rather than problematic. In addition, when talking about appeals to the people and looking at these parts, the Senior Civil Servant Corruption Investigations Unit claimed that this part is a typical conviction and does not regret his crime at all, so it is likely to repeat it again when he is arrested. In fact, it is reported that there was a circumstance in which he tried to implement the second martial law during the actual process of the warrant. The Senior Civil Servant Corruption Investigations Unit also said, "There was a cell phone that President Yoon had been using since he was a prosecutor, and since he replaced this cell phone and deleted Telegram, there is a high risk of destroying evidence." In addition, two bulletproof vehicles believed to have been aboard President Yoon on the day of the execution of the first arrest warrant attempted to flee to the presidential chief of staff's residence outside the scope of the search warrant. In other words, he attempted to flee on the day of the execution of the first arrest warrant. Therefore, some reports say that the fear of running away cannot be ruled out. So, President Yoon Suk Yeol's lawyer immediately refuted this. It is said that he emphasized that he had never tried to take refuge, and that President Yoon Suk Yeol was at the presidential residence in both the first and second rounds of arrest warrants. In the case of cell phone replacements, didn't President Yoon Suk Yeol hold a press conference? After the suspicion of Myung Tae-kyun emerged, he reportedly refuted the allegations head-on, saying that he would replace the cell phone he used by the prosecution at a press conference on November 7th, and that he would replace it because he said he was worried about the public.

[Anchor]
We've been talking about the concern of destroying evidence. Isn't it the fear of escape and destruction of evidence that is important in determining the criteria for arrest under the Criminal Procedure Act? Of course, the judge who examines the warrant must have considered this a lot today, right?

[Son Jeonghye]
The purpose of arresting and investigating the suspect is to quickly discover the truth of the substance by smoothly and quickly. As such, if the seriousness of the crime is recognized, ordinary people are concerned about running away. In particular, if you do not confess to the crime while pleading not guilty, there are quite a few cases of attempting to destroy data that are unfavorable to you, so it is usually evaluated that there is a possibility of destroying evidence. As such, it is very important to consider whether the judge in charge of the warrant for the substantive examination of the arrest warrant is likely to destroy evidence as the president's current authority. In particular, in recent years, security officials have faced an armed conflict crisis in the form of refusing to comply with the investigation's summons and not responding to the summons, so we will closely see if there is a possibility of recurrence of this part in the future. Because there is room for questioning whether the trial process can be carried out smoothly if the arrest warrant is dismissed without issuing it, the attitude of the suspect and whether he or she will come out cooperatively in the future investigation and trial process are likely to be very important requirements, so I can tell you that the current president's refusal to recognize the subject of the investigation by the Senior Civil Servant Corruption Investigations Unit or not actively cooperating with the summons may be unfavorable. However, the suspect's claim is that there is insufficient or no evidence to destroy because there is sufficient evidence, and that he does not run away because he is in the presidency. However, the concept of escape can include hiding in a difficult way for investigators to investigate. As such, it is very likely that the judge will consider the possibility of destroying evidence and running away from it with future investigations and trials in mind.

[Anchor]
News continues to come from near the Western District Court, and the Senior Civil Servant Corruption Investigations Unit has reported that two vehicles related to the Senior Civil Servant Corruption Investigations Unit were damaged due to the protesters' deterrence. And I'm deeply sorry that it's an act that interferes with legitimate law enforcement, he said. We report that two vehicles, including the prosecutor of the Senior Civil Servant Corruption Investigations Unit, were damaged and threatened by protesters near the Western District Court at around 8 p.m. The Senior Civil Servant Corruption Investigations Unit said it deeply regrets the obstruction of law enforcement. Protesters who damaged the vehicle will be asked for strong punishment based on police evidence. We're sending you related report videos right now, and there's a lot of police personnel. You are also seeing a considerable number of protesters. There is also a risk of accidents because a lot of people are gathered in a small space now. In the process, two vehicles of the Senior Civil Servant Corruption Investigations Unit were damaged due to the protesters' blockade. We will continue to deliver related news from the following news. It is said that the results will be released as early as late tonight and early tomorrow morning, but even after the results come out, there could be concerns about such safety accidents. Since there are so many people here.


[This is]
is correct. But what is clear is that I hope viewers and those at the protest site remember that this is a clear criminal offense. No matter how much I do for a legitimate purpose or to support the person I support, it can never be recognized as a legitimate act. Using multiple powers, and the fact that the wind is now deflated on the wheel, we can assume that this situation occurred by using something very sharp to make a hole in the wheel, but if so, we carried a dangerous object and interfered with the legitimate execution of public affairs. This could be a crime of obstructing the execution of special public affairs. It can also be seen as an act of damaging public property. Usually, in the case of obstruction of public affairs, even if it is a first-time offender, it does not end with a fine, but the old trial is disposed of. This is because the court considers the part that interfered with the work of legitimate state agencies and investigative agencies very seriously, and the same is true for investigative agencies. So now that the police have also collected all the circumstances, it seems that they will probably summon them sequentially after identifying them. So, I think these parts may correspond to obstruction of the execution of special public affairs and may correspond to acts such as destruction of public property, so I think they should not be done.

[Anchor]
The warrant results are expected to be released later tonight or early tomorrow, so there is a very crowded situation around the western part of Seoul. Among the various presidential issues in Yoon Suk Yeol, what is the judge paying the most attention to and seeing?

[Son Jeonghye]
As you said, among the reasons for the arrest warrant, the possibility of destroying evidence and the fear of escape are very important, but in conclusion, if the explanation for the crime has not been reached, two things can be dismissed as open to a dispute over the crime, so it seems that the Senior Civil Servant Corruption Investigations Unit tried to provide sufficient evidence for the crime as considerable investigation data. As you can see, it is very likely that considerable data has been submitted, and the criminal claim form also contains more than 100 pages of detailed explanations of the circumstances, explanations of the plan, specific statements and instructions about the participants, and that various evidence has already been secured and sufficient evidence for the establishment of the rebellion. However, even if the president ordered the National Assembly to control or did not order the arrest of lawmakers, or even if he made such an order, there is a possibility that he/she made such an argument that this is not the purpose of the constitution of the state, but the exercise of his/her own authority for a legitimate purpose. In light of these specific actions and concrete evidence, I think I'm thinking about how likely there is to be a crime of rebellion. In this regard, it is known that reference persons related to the considerable statements of the military and martial law command have been submitted. This statement is highly credible, so we are actually looking at the circumstances and direct evidence to support it, although there is no specific statement about whether the president said it or not.

[Anchor]
I see. In addition to the fear of destroying evidence, he said earlier that it is an important factor in issuing an arrest warrant even if there is a fear of running away, especially if running away is not only a physical movement, but also if you refuse to comply with the investigation or cooperate well. He said this. Perhaps that's why President Yoon himself missed his expectations today. What do you think?

[Son Jeonghye]
It should be said that the president's attendance strongly expressed his willingness to exercise the suspect's defense rights without exception. In addition, since an arrest warrant is a key part of the most important criminal procedure in which a suspect is transferred to an arrested suspect, not only did I show my willingness to go out and persuade the court in person, but I also showed that I attended because my direct appeal of my injustice had the effect of rallying my supporters. In particular, the fact that they did not voluntarily respond to the second investigation by the Senior Civil Servant Corruption Investigations Unit yesterday and did not conduct a summons investigation was very disadvantageous legally. Because not only does it not recognize the subject of the investigation, but it is difficult to admit that it does not comply with the summons despite the arrest, and this can be evaluated as ignoring the judiciary or the investigation process, so it can be interpreted as not respecting the order of the judiciary if it does not go to the court. As such, it seems that he has expressed his willingness to show a changed position to some extent with a sincere attitude that he will participate in the proceedings according to the court. In particular, the court also has the right to ask about the status of a suspect, but the absence of a suspect is read as a very uncooperative attitude and an unrepentant attitude. That's why it's interpreted as a surprise decision to attend.

[Anchor]
Hasn't the arrest suit filed by President Yoon Suk Yeol with the Seoul Central District Court earlier been dismissed? But what is different from this arrest warrant review?

{이고}First of all, it can be understood that the request for an arrest suit is a procedure to determine whether the arrest warrant and the arrest process were legitimate. At that time, the President of Yoon Suk Yeol argued the same thing about whether the Senior Civil Servant Corruption Investigations Unit had the right to investigate the crime of rebellion. Nevertheless, the Central District Court ruled that the arrest was legal. Despite such a judgment, even the Seoul Central District Court, where Yoon Suk Yeol insisted on continuing to seek warrants, still lacked the same formal requirements for today's substantive examination of the arrest warrant. It continued to claim that there was a violation of jurisdiction and that the investigation was conducted by the Senior Civil Servant Corruption Investigations Unit, which did not have the right to investigate. So, this part made the same argument, but the difference is that the argument that there is no need for restraint has been added. As I said earlier, the Senior Civil Servant Corruption Investigations Unit is known to have made a statement through PPT for quite a few 70 minutes of the warrant review, but I think they provided very detailed evidence. President Yoon Suk Yeol has already destroyed evidence through these things, such as removing previously used cell phones or deleting Telegram, and it is highly likely that he will continue to destroy it in this way. It's believed to have claimed it like this. President Yoon Suk Yeol also specifically talked about the high risk of running away by telling the circumstances that he was trying to take refuge when various first arrest warrants were executed, and there is no need for arrest.
The danger of recidivism is completely groundless, and I have never tried to take refuge, and I said and changed my cell phone at a press conference for the public, so this part is not intended to eliminate evidence of the investigation at all. So, I think the difference between the request for an arrest suit and the current one is that the argument of whether or not arrest is necessary is added a little more.

[Anchor]
President Yoon made a surprise appearance in today's warrant examination, but until then, he has refused to comply with the investigation and has not read or signed the records of the Senior Civil Servant Corruption Investigations Unit. This is also submitted to the court, and the judge who will examine the warrant today will confirm all of it, right?

[Son Jeonghye]
That's right. Since there is only one suspect interrogation report, even if there is no single suspect interrogation report seal, it is very likely that the report has been submitted and should be submitted to reveal that the future investigation process may not proceed properly if the investigative agency does not actively respond to the investigation. Currently, the president's position seems to have changed a lot since the rejection of the arrest suit. So, despite the fact that the violation of the jurisdiction is very large and it is not the subject of the investigation, the court seems to have made a strategic judgment that if the argument is rejected several times, that is, once in the West, it can be very unfavorable as a suspect who does not respect the court's decision. In the future, the judge will decide whether to issue an arrest warrant or not. The judge finally decides whether or not the crime of rebellion is established. Nevertheless, even if it is a small application or decision stage, an attitude that does not respect the judiciary is likely to be read as a challenge to the judiciary, and even though the president has to be very careful about this, he made the same mistake several times, with lawyer Seok Dong-hyun presenting today, saying that he would give him a chance to make up for his mistakes in this process. So to express that you will give the court a chance to correct it with the misconception that it has done something wrong does not respect the authority of the judiciary. As such, aren't you suspected of attempting to arrest an incumbent judge in or related to a decree because not only such remarks need to be made carefully, but also because you have such a perception? If all of these procedures are considered to be responsible for protecting the constitutional order as a president and have no basic respect for the judiciary, there is room for the impeachment trial and can lead to very negative perceptions or prejudices in all court proceedings, so I would like to say that it is very important for the suspect to respect the court as much as possible.

[Anchor]
I was also very interested in the judge in charge. Since it's the weekend, the judge on duty is in charge, not the judge in charge of the warrant, is this a little unusual? Or does this happen often in your daily life?

[Lee Go-eun]
In the original Western District Court, a warrant judge hears a warrant on weekdays. However, on weekends, the judges on duty are taking turns looking at the warrant. Therefore, as usual, it seems that Cha Eun-kyung, a senior judge who was on duty on the weekend, was in charge because the warrant was scheduled for the weekend. However, for the first time in constitutional history, there have been various stories about whether it is appropriate for a weekend judge to hear a warrant against a sitting president, not a warrant judge. However, if I express my opinion carefully, I think that more problems may arise when dealing with it, unlike the usual example. Usually, when the general public undergoes a warrant review on the weekend in the Western District Court, if the judge on duty on the same weekend hears it, President Yoon Suk Yeol will also be less likely to be caught up in the scandal later on. In accordance with the usual example, senior judge Cha Eun-kyung, who will be on duty on the weekend, will be in charge of the warrant's review.

[Anchor]
Due to the time, we'll stop here for now. Son Jung-hye and Lee Go-eun, two lawyers, joined together. Thank you.