Constitutional presidential arrest for the first time...Court rampage 'strict punishment'

■ Host: Anchor Yoon Bori, anchor Kim Myung-geun, anchor
■ Starring: Attorney Kim Sung-soo

* 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 summarize the news of the issuance of an arrest warrant and the situation of violence in the court with lawyer Kim Sung-soo.

[Anchor]
Early this morning, an arrest warrant was issued for President Yoon. At the same time, news came out that he was accepted after going through the formal admission process. After that, the situation will be different from the time of arrest, right?

[Kim Sung-soo]
I'll explain what changes the situation within the detention center. President Yoon Suk Yeol is a suspect who has not been arrested until last time and whether he will be arrested or not. That's why there's a waiting room. It is known that he was in the waiting room waiting for the decision to book, and that's why he was wearing a suit, not a veterinarian. But isn't the arrest decided? Then, from then on, the arrest will be officially decided, so you will go through the admission process. There is a law on what these admission procedures are, the execution of sentences and the treatment of prisoners.

If you look here, Article 19 will take pictures and take fingerprints on the admission process. It goes through a procedure that can be identified with other detainees who designate the detainee's number, and since then, Sue has been wearing a suit, but there are parts that need to be changed into a veterinarian, and there is a possibility that the situation that was actually in the waiting room will be transferred to the room alone. As a result, I think I can tell you that in the future, investigations and impeachment trials will be conducted in the solitary room.

[Anchor]
Will the mugshot be released this time?

[Kim Sung-soo]
Since mugshots are taken for identification, it is difficult to say that they are released, and in the case of mugshots, it was revealed through requirements for felonies, right? That's why it's going to be difficult to reveal the mugshot.

[Anchor]
The Senior Civil Servant Corruption Investigations Unit previously strongly insisted on the need for arrest in relation to the request for an arrest warrant, but the biggest reason for the court's issuance of an arrest warrant was the fear of destroying evidence. I think he actually acknowledged the fear of escape, so what points did he consider?

[Kim Sung-soo]
As you said, I think the most important part was that the concern of escape was recognized. According to Article 70 of the Criminal Procedure Act, it should be premised that considerable reasons to suspect that a crime was committed as a requirement for issuing an arrest warrant are recognized. And for this reason, the investigation can be carried out while in custody only when one of the three requirements is recognized: housing is uneven, there is a fear of flight, or there is a fear of destroying evidence.

Therefore, can these three requirements be recognized? Is there any considerable reason to suspect that he committed a crime? The Senior Civil Servant Corruption Investigations Unit would have tried to persuade the court that there was one, and the lawyer would have argued that there was no one. As a result, it is known that they argued sharply about this, and each of the Senior Civil Servant Corruption Investigations Unit conducted about 70 minutes of PPT, and the lawyer also went through the process of explaining about 70 minutes.

Nevertheless, there are various speculations about this because the court decided that there was a concern of destroying evidence and issued a warrant because it judged that the requirements were met. Among the various speculations, one of the things that the Senior Civil Servant Corruption Investigations Unit emphasized was the fact that President Yoon Suk Yeol replaced his phone, and there was a mobile phone messaging app called Telegram.

Looking at the fact that they left this, it seems that they claimed that they were willing to destroy evidence. And I think he claimed that there was a concern about destroying evidence in these areas when non-House phones and related servers were not secured at the time, which can be seen as important evidence. Another factor that makes a judgment regarding the fear of destruction of evidence is whether this person's current status or whether there is a physical part that can destroy evidence, and there seems to be such speculation about whether there is a possibility of influence because he is an incumbent president.

[Anchor]
I think President Yoon expected that the warrant could be dismissed if the president himself attended yesterday and expressed the legitimacy of martial law. What do you think?

[Kim Sung-soo]
As for the issuance of the arrest warrant, eight lawyers were present yesterday, and President Yoon Suk Yeol himself was also present, right? Previously, there was a position that they would not attend if a warrant review was held at the Seoul Western District Court. However, that part has been changed, and it seems that the parties directly attended during the warrant review process and responded to the court's interrogation, and these things were considered advantageous. The fact that all eight lawyers were present is a part that can be said to have made all-out efforts. That's why I did my best yesterday regarding the warrant. I think it was trying to increase the possibility of rejection as much as possible.

[Anchor]
In the end, the court rejected the claims of President Yoon and the lawyers, but should the court consider that the head of the civil war raised by the Senior Civil Servant Corruption Investigations Unit was actually admitted?

[Kim Sung-soo]
You have to look at this part separately. Didn't I mention Article 70 of the Criminal Procedure Act? This is the part about the reason for the restraint. It presupposes that there is considerable reason to suspect that he has committed a crime. Therefore, the court admitted that there was considerable reason to suspect that he had committed a crime, but it is difficult to say that he was definitely guilty, so we have to look at this separately. Under this criminal law, the court's definitive judgment on the crime of rebellion or abuse of authority is, in the end, a definitive judgment is made by a final judgment. Therefore, I think the difference between the issuance of a warrant and the facts of the final judgment should be seen.

[Anchor]
With the issuance of an arrest warrant for President Yoon, the president's office criticized the opposition politicians for not being equitable. So when it comes to opposition politicians, I don't think they talk about Lee Jae-myung and Cho Kuk, but in what way do they argue that it is not fair?

[Kim Sung-soo]
The claim of the passport was that an arrest warrant was filed around September 2023 in the case of CEO Lee Jae-myung. At that time, it was dismissed. Therefore, there seems to be one argument about why this is not applied equally to President Yoon Suk Yeol because there were parts that were dismissed at the time for various reasons. Also, in the case of former representative Cho Kuk, he was sentenced to prison in the second trial. However, even at that time, he wasn't arrested immediately, and eventually he wasn't arrested until it was confirmed, but was arrested after it was confirmed. Therefore, the opposition party's representative is slow to arrest in this case, but why is it so fast against the president of Yoon Suk Yeol?

However, if we look at equity, there are parts where the case itself cannot be considered the same, and there are parts where the judgment can be different for each court. Therefore, if the same court judges differently on the same facts, it can be judged that there is a problem with equity, but since there are different facts and circumstances, I think there are different parts that we need to look at whether it can be a problem with equity.

[Anchor]
Since he is the leader of the opposition party, there is no fear of running away. The dismissal came out last time because there was a reason for Lee Jae-myung. Then, among the concerns about running away and destruction of evidence, I focused on the fear of destruction of evidence. Can I look at it like this?

[Kim Sung-soo]
That's right. That's why I think there's a reason for the destruction of evidence. In the case of flight concerns, if the president of Yoon Suk Yeol moves somewhere, the possibility of escape is very low because it is highly likely to be reported. Therefore, I think the most important issue is whether there is a concern about destroying evidence. As President Yoon Suk Yeol said earlier, there is a risk of destroying evidence if efforts can be made to ensure that non-phones and such parts are not secured by using physical methods and influences. I think it was a comprehensive judgment on those parts, and even if representative Lee Jae-myung judged that there were no concerns about flight, he would have judged the possibility of destroying evidence based on various circumstances, so this part is not necessarily fair, yes, it cannot be concluded like this.

[Anchor]
If so, can the decision to issue an arrest warrant reduce the criticism of the investigation ability of the Senior Civil Servant Corruption Investigations Unit?

[Kim Sung-soo]
Since the launch of the Senior Civil Servant Corruption Investigations Unit, there have been many cases where warrants have been dismissed. As a result, some say that the warrant is lacking in capability. First of all, an arrest warrant was issued in this case, and an arrest warrant was issued, right? I think the criticism of the capabilities related to the warrant will fade, but as for the investigation, the investigation to persuade the court that there is a certain crime through the investigation is a very important part, but it is not yet clear about the investigation ability, so I think there will be various opinions on the Senior Civil Servant Corruption Investigations Unit in the future.

[Anchor]
The Senior Civil Servant Corruption Investigations Unit said it would start an investigation into President Yoon at 2 o'clock today. President Yoon expressed this position, saying, "There is nothing more to say at the Airborne Department." In the future, the investigation of the Senior Civil Servant Corruption Investigations Unit also hinted at refusal to comply, but it seems that they will stick to the position that they cannot admit the investigation of the Senior Civil Servant Corruption Investigations Unit?

[Kim Sung-soo]
An investigation was conducted on the day President Yoon Suk Yeol executed an arrest warrant. And at that time, it can be said that there was no actual answer because of the exercise of the right to refuse to make a statement. And there was a part that could be considered that the record itself was not established because it was not stamped on the investigation. After that, he refused to attend. We could have been interested in whether to respond if the Senior Civil Servant Corruption Investigations Unit continues to refuse to attend or exercise the right to refuse to make a statement after the arrest warrant is issued. However, the Senior Civil Servant Corruption Investigations Unit informed us at 2 p.m. today that it will conduct an investigation and the President of Yoon Suk Yeol has done everything he needs to talk about. So, even if the Senior Civil Servant Corruption Investigations Unit moves to the detention center and continues to exercise the right to refuse to make statements, it may have no benefit in the end. If this part becomes a part of delaying time, I think we have no choice but to think about how to deal with it.

[Anchor]
Since President Yoon's side comes out like this, the Senior Civil Servant Corruption Investigations Unit said that they will review the forced inches and door-to-door investigations. What are some ways the Senior Civil Servant Corruption Investigations Unit can force an investigation?

[Kim Sung-soo]
For the Senior Civil Servant Corruption Investigations Unit to force the investigation, there may be a way for the prosecutor to go directly to the detention center and conduct the investigation. In addition, if an arrest warrant is issued, there was a Supreme Court precedent that the process of recruiting is not illegal, so you can consider recruiting. However, if there is room for another dispute in the process of recruiting, and then even if you did, if you exercise your right to refuse to state and there is no real benefit, isn't it inevitable that continuing this will result in a delay in time? In particular, if you are in custody, you have to decide whether to prosecute and prosecute within 20 days, so if that time is very short, I think you have no choice but to think about whether it is right to continue delaying the time.

[Anchor]
If the Senior Civil Servant Corruption Investigations Unit chooses to go to the detention center and forcibly investigate, the Senior Civil Servant Corruption Investigations Unit will investigate until the 10th after the arrest. After that, the prosecution will investigate for about 10 more days, but then the Senior Civil Servant Corruption Investigations Unit will investigate until January 24, when do you think the Senior Civil Servant Corruption Investigations Unit will conduct a forced investigation before that?

[Kim Sung-soo]
Hasn't an arrest warrant been issued? Then, in principle, the arrest period is 10 days. And it is based on the premise that it will be 20 days because it can be extended for another 10 days by obtaining permission for extension. In this case, on the premise of 20 days, the Senior Civil Servant Corruption Investigations Unit said it would proceed with 10 days at the Senior Civil Servant Corruption Investigations Unit and 10 days at the prosecution. But during the arrest period, isn't there a period of time when you were under arrest and are now in prison? This part is also included.

It's not 10 days, but there's a shorter time. Since the Senior Civil Servant Corruption Investigations Unit does not have enough time, whether to immediately consider a compulsory method when it fails to respond to the notice of attendance today. Or whether to review it after one or two more notifications. Otherwise, there are many possibilities as to whether to send the case to the prosecution and the prosecution will review it again because there is no real benefit in the current state, so I think the Senior Civil Servant Corruption Investigations Unit is still thinking about this.

[Anchor]
President Yoon seems to be in a position to refuse to be investigated by the Senior Civil Servant Corruption Investigations Unit in the future. Then, will the prosecution respond to the investigation?

[Kim Sung-soo]
First of all, one of the reasons for refusing to comply with the investigation by the Senior Civil Servant Corruption Investigations Unit is claiming that it has no investigative power. According to the Corruption Investigations Unit Act, there are crimes subject to investigation in Article 2. That part includes abuse of authority. However, in the case of rebellion, it is not explicitly included, but in the case of a case recognized as a related crime, there is a part that can be investigated based on abuse of authority, and the Senior Civil Servant Corruption Investigations Unit argues that rebellion can also be investigated as a related crime. On the part of President Yoon Suk Yeol, the crime of abuse of authority can be seen as a much lower crime when looking at the sentence of rebellion and abuse of authority.

As a result, he keeps repeating that he has no right to investigate, claiming whether it is correct to hit the torso using the tail. However, in the case of the prosecution, it can be concluded that the prosecution also has direct investigation rights for abuse of authority using corruption crimes through the prosecution's Office Act and the adjustment of the prosecution's investigation rights. If the prosecution claims that it has the same logic to investigate the crime of abuse of authority and can investigate the crime of rebellion for related crimes, it is the same logic, so if President Yoon Suk Yeol claims that the prosecution has no right to investigate, it could be a reason for refusal, and I think there will be many ways in which the prosecution will judge this.

[Anchor]
Let's talk about the violence in the Western District. After news of the issuance of the warrant broke at dawn, some protesters stormed the courthouse, causing violence. The head of the court administration also visited the court and the Supreme Court also expressed concern about the situation, so how do you see the court rampage?

[Kim Sung-soo]
I think it's a very serious situation. We are divided into three parts. Korean law is carried out through the separation of powers, and it is the executive, legislative, and judicial branches. The executive branch is the government and the legislative branch is the National Assembly. The judiciary is the court. And how the system works is that the legislature creates laws that can be called the rules of the country, and this is the administration. And when you receive any judgment, the judiciary goes through such a process as making the judgment of the court. Because they are dissatisfied with the court's judgment, physical damage to the court can be seen as a very serious act of denying the separation of powers itself. Therefore, it can be seen as a very serious situation in this area, and if there is a dispute over legal interpretation and cannot be admitted to such an act, there are areas in the legal system that can be argued through binding pride or a final ruling in the future. Nevertheless, I think it is right to refrain from harming the court beyond the legal system.

[Anchor]
We're seeing something that's never happened before. I think this court rampage is also unprecedented. Acting President Choi Sang-mok also gave a special order to the National Police Agency, and the National Police Agency said it would deal with it strictly. How should I handle this case?

[Kim Sung-soo]
There is a high possibility that it will be dealt with strictly. The current act itself can be a lot of crimes. And as I said earlier, the act itself against the judiciary can eventually break the order of the whole society if it does not acknowledge the judgment of the court. If someone says that I can't admit the court's judgment in the future and inflicts harm or physical eviction on the court, the separation of powers and respect for the judiciary cannot be achieved, and if so, there may be situations in which no one follows the law.

Therefore, we have to refrain from this as much as possible, and wasn't there a dispute between the security service and the Senior Civil Servant Corruption Investigations Unit at the time of the arrest warrant? And even at that time, physical disputes did not eventually progress, and the reason why it could be replaced at that time was because there were parts that could claim various legal grounds such as the Presidential Security Act, and which law could be prioritized. In this case, there is a high possibility of interpretation that can be seen as punishable rather than legal basis, so I can tell you that it is correct to refrain from this as much as possible.

[Anchor]
Even before the protesters stormed the court, some diehard supporters were arrested by the police over the court wall. Yoon Sang-hyun, a member of the People's Power, has expressed this message that they will be released soon. Do you also think this message triggered supporters to do this?

[Kim Sung-soo]
I think there could be such an opinion. However, I think we have to be careful about whether it was a real fuse for that part. However, many YouTubers and other people are saying that physical events should be held.

It is right to refrain from such matters as much as possible because the investigative agency is currently investigating such matters and saying that if there is anything illegal, it can be punished. As I said earlier, if the judgment of the law is clearly difficult, I think I should say it again because it is not an act that should be argued within the legal system, and that part should not be damaged or harmed by the court.

[Anchor]
He said he would also investigate the forces behind the protesters. So could some far-right YouTubers who are inciting protests or provoking supporters be subject to investigation as well?

[Kim Sung-soo]
I think we need to review the legal principles first. If you instruct a specific target to act, you can do it as a teacher or helper, but if not, it can be reviewed whether it is possible to establish a teacher or helper. Currently, about 40 people were arrested before the decision was made, and about 46 people were reportedly arrested through rampage after the decision, but I think we should refrain from these matters as carefully as possible because the laws will be applied differently to each act and it can be punished if someone sees them as giving these instructions.

[Anchor]
I just asked if it was a trigger for the lawmaker's remarks, but wasn't there a U.S. Congressional intrusion in the U.S. earlier on this part? There was a rumor that President-elect Trump would pardon such a case if he was elected, but I think he was influenced by this. What do you think?

[Kim Sung-soo]
It seems that it is difficult to predict whether the people who are currently protesting in the United States have reflected or considered it. In addition, the legal system of the United States and Korea is different, and legally, just because the president of the United States talked about this, it does not mean that it can be applied to Korea, so we have to look at it separately, and there can be a lot of crimes in this area. It is recommended to refrain from these areas because there is a possibility of criminal punishment for Article 115 under the Criminal Act, obstruction of the execution of special public affairs, obstruction of the execution of special public affairs, intrusion of common housing, destruction of public goods, etc. And there seems to be a psychology that if you do the case, it becomes more violent when you're a group and it might not be caught, or that I can do this because I did it with these people.

However, in this case, even a group can be specified through evidence, and even a group cannot be punished if they violate the criminal law. Therefore, there are parts that need to be looked at more carefully, so I think I should tell you something to be careful about.

[Anchor]
Waldam protesters yesterday, and protesters who went on a rampage in the courthouse early this morning, what's the level of punishment?

[Kim Sung-soo]
A number of crimes are currently being discussed. In the case of crimes required under the criminal law, this can be established because it stipulates a fine of more than one year, less than one year, and less than 15 million won in the case of assault, intimidation, and damage. There is an obstruction of the execution of special public affairs. This is true when the majority interferes with the execution of public affairs or interferes with the execution of public affairs with dangerous objects, and in this case, the general obstruction of public affairs is less than 5 years and less than 10 million won, and if a special case is attached, it becomes a serious sentence that increases up to half. As such, this part can also be reviewed. And the police were injured in the process of obstructing the execution of special services.If this happens, this can lead to obstruction of the execution of special public affairs at this time, and this can be a serious crime for more than three years, so caution is needed in this area as well. Since the special apartment invasion and destruction of public goods have punishment regulations for less than five years and less than seven years, I think the court will comprehensively review these areas and make a final decision.

[Anchor]
This time, let's talk about the security service. YTN reporters met Kim Sung-hoon, the deputy chief of the presidential security office, alone near the Seoul Detention Center, who was released after the prosecution rejected the arrest warrant. Deputy Director Kim said he would guard President Yoon Suk Yeol who was arrested while staying in the detention center 24 hours a day. Let's listen to it for ourselves.

[Reporter]
I have a simple question. Why are you here today?

[Kim Sung Hoon]
Since the president is here, I'm here for security.

[Reporter]
Then, did you return to security in the future?

[Reporter]
Yes. (As Deputy Chief?) Of course, yes.

[Reporter]
The arrest warrant has been turned down, how are you looking at it?

[Kim Sung Hoon]
I got it from the detention center.

[Reporter]
What's your reaction to the rejection?

[Kim Sung Hoon]
I don't make a hasty judgment, but I think it's still a common sense judgment about the work I performed.

[Reporter]
Are you planning to respond to the police investigation?

[Kim Sung Hoon]
Of course. I didn't comply with the summons at that time, but as you know, it was a severe period. Since that mission is a priority, I also submitted my opinion that I would prioritize the mission and comply with the police summons.

[Reporter]
Do you have plans to summon him again?

[Kim Sung Hoon]
I don't know about that, but if I subpoena, I'll comply.

[Reporter]
The president is in custody, so what are you going to do with your security?

[Kim Sung-hoon]
There is no difference, but rather, security measures will be taken differently depending on the risk level.

[Reporter]
In what way?

[Kim Sung Hoon]
You have to judge above. For example, in the case of a safe residence or the presidential office, isn't there security? Moreover, in the case of this detention center, there are other vulnerable areas, so the corresponding protective measures will be taken.

[Reporter]
The same goes for the official residence?

[Kim Sung Hoon]
Of course. (Because there's a lady? ) Of course.

[Reporter]
There's been a lot of reports and public opinion about what happened at birthday parties and security offices. What do you think about this?

[Kim Sung Hoon]
Of course, it is technically security work and can be done, but as I said last time, it is a world where people live. So, don't you do things like having an event or singing a song? Don't you do the same for your boss, who serves you as if you're having a celebratory party for your colleagues? It's an expression that we can say that we spent a budget or didn't give it to you, but we didn't hear it, but we didn't. That's not Yoon Bei-cheon.It's not like this. [Reporter] From now on, the deputy head of the department will be in the detention center for 24 hours, working on security.

[Kim Sung-hoon]
Almost do that.

[Anchor]
I watched the interview video exclusively secured by YTN. To talk about Kim Sung-hoon, the prosecution rejected the arrest warrant for the deputy bodyguard requested by the police. What do you think is the reason?

[Kim Sung-soo]
Let me explain the reason why the police rejected it first. If the police apply for an arrest warrant, the prosecution will once again review whether to request an arrest warrant. And if it is correct to claim this part, the court will conduct a substantial review through the claim, and if it will not be issued when the claim is made or if there is an inappropriate part, it will be rejected. Currently, the police applied for an arrest warrant for the deputy bodyguard, but the prosecution rejected it, and to explain the reason for applying for an arrest warrant, Deputy Chief Kim Sung-hoon was arrested. If you are arrested, you must do it within 48 hours.

That's why he was arrested the day before yesterday and it seems that he applied because it was within 48 hours, and the prosecution would have requested this if there were concerns about flight or destruction of evidence, but isn't he present now? There seems to be a judgment that some evidence has been secured to some extent in the case of attendance and obstruction of the execution of special public affairs. That's why I turned it down, and because of that, I was released today.

[Anchor]
Deputy Director Kim Sung-hoon said that security will be provided because the detention center is somewhat vulnerable. Can I do a separate security service in the detention center?

[Kim Sung-soo]
In the end, I think the detention center and the bodyguard should consult. However, isn't there any work that these people, correctional officials of the Ministry of Justice, are working on within the detention center? Because of that, it is necessary to see how far the security service can perform the security service, and even when he is currently under arrest, there is a story that the security service inside the building itself has not been carried out, so we need to see how much consultation there will be with the correction headquarters.

[Anchor]
Let's stop here. So far, I've been with lawyer Kim Sung-soo. Thank you for talking today.