Yoon's entrance statement to prison, "You must express your opinion in a peaceful way."

■ Host: Anchor Jang Won-seok and anchor Lee Eun-sol
■ Starring: 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]
As I told you earlier, some supporters who oppose the arrest of President Yoon Suk Yeol stormed into the Seoul Western District Court and committed violence.

[Anchor]
President Yoon expressed his concern through a statement of his position in prison, asking him to express his opinion in a peaceful way. Let's take a look at the contents related to lawyer Son Jung-hye.

[Anchor]
We're continuing to report on the video, but the windows are also broken a lot. And the walls were destroyed and even assaulted police officers. Police arrested several people on charges of building break-ins and so on, what charges will they be specifically charged with?

[Son Jeonghye]
It is necessary to separately establish what crimes are established for each individual's actions, but when looking at the disturbance and disturbance from the report, the biggest statutory punishment is the crime of need. There is a possibility of a very serious crime, as it is stipulated that in the case of violence, intimidation, or property damage, multiple people will be sentenced to more than one year and not more than 10 years in prison. Next, among the crimes that harm public security, there is the crime of multiple dissolution that does not respond to dissolution. The failure to comply with the order of dissolution by an authorized public official at the time could be a crime of multiple dissolution. Furthermore, at the same time, according to the Assembly Act, there is a provision for criminal punishment even if they do not comply with such a dissolution order.

In addition, breaking into the court is not only a building invasion, but also a crime of obstructing the execution of public affairs and obstructing the execution of special public affairs through this means, and there is room for damage to public property, so it can be subject to investigation on a lot of charges. Until now, the Constitutional Court has never been the subject of an invasion or a disturbance. I don't remember any history of being punished for these incriminating crimes in recent decades. I can tell you that a very serious crime has occurred that should not have happened. Basically, it's an act of intrusion and violence against a court, but it's a serious issue that can be considered an act of aggression against the entire judiciary.

[Anchor]
You pointed out that it could be a subject of investigation for many charges, but as many videos were circulating, YouTubers broadcasted in real time. Is it possible to confiscate the income from broadcasting or the currency used there?

[Son Jeonghye]
In the case of YouTubers, there is room for encouraging such collective action or attracting it while triggering anger. Therefore, if some YouTubers promote such violent behavior or specifically instruct a specific person to commit such violent behavior, there is room for criminal responsibility for it, so it should be the subject of an investigation. Furthermore, there are reports that some of these YouTubers have earned hundreds of millions of won and tens of millions of won in a week.
I can't help but criticize that I did a more stimulating and impulsive broadcast for him. However, regarding these profits, we need to consider the Crime Profit Concealment Control Act to see if we can confiscate them. The Crime Profit Concealment Control Act is basically a property crime, and for example, in the case of organized violence and terrorism, the profits of related crimes can be confiscated, but it is difficult to confiscate YouTuber profits directly from broadcasting.

However, if the current behavior of YouTubers is linked to rioting and the causal relationship can be recognized, you may consider claiming civil damages. The current court has destroyed the property, and not only does it take a lot of time to restore it, but many police officers are also injured, which requires medical expenses. If we estimate the damage to this, it is expected to be a considerable loss now, so it seems that those who directly committed such violence, those who instigated it, and those who helped it can all jointly claim tort liability.

[Anchor]
Cha Eun-kyung, a senior judge at the Seoul Western District Court who issued an arrest warrant early this morning, asked the police for personal protection. It is known that some of the people who went on a rampage over there today were looking for Judge Cha, so what kind of protection will be done against him?

[Son Jeonghye]
For the time being, I think we should give them a break, that is, a vacation. Furthermore, the police are also taking measures to protect their personal safety.You can think of it as accompanying you when you get off work, and the second is that you are expected to take measures to immediately respond to threatening situations by providing smart watches. And now, it's not an individual matter about Judge Cha Eun-kyung, but you can reach a similar conclusion no matter which judge you went to. A number of lawyers did the same analysis. As such, it was issued by the court because the significance and necessity of arrest were recognized among the constitutional requirements of the legal order that we have, rather than considering that the arrest warrant was issued based on individual disposition or individual judgment. I'd like to say that attacking an individual like this is a very dangerous behavior. And the person who wrote the other day that he would harm the judge even turned himself in through a lawyer. I can tell you again that very severe punishment can be followed.

[Anchor]
A little while ago, President Yoon's entrance to prison came out. Some analysts say that they have entered prison politics, but what did you think?

[Son Jung-hye]
On the other hand, since activities are now restricted externally, it is expected that message politics will be conducted through lawyers, and such message politics can't help but be considered as having the impeachment trial in mind. The current investigation and trial of civil war is a matter that requires a fierce legal battle between lawyers, trials and investigative agencies, but the Constitutional Court still seems likely to engage in letter and social media politics in some ways to rally supporters and not disappoint them, judging that it is difficult to consider the majority of public opinion and consider the opinions of the people.

Fortunately, I ask you to express your intention in a peaceful way today, and I think it's a relief to express your opinion that solving it in a physical way can be a great national wound. In other words, if President Yoon Suk Yeol was a prosecutor and the prosecutor general, what kind of investigation did the prosecutor do to present the results of an investigation that some people were dissatisfied with, President Yoon Suk Yeol would have told the prosecutor's office to arrest and investigate all of them immediately.

However, even if we change our position, it should be pointed out that it is an unacceptable crime for anyone to engage in violence, property damage, or injury in a way that expresses dissatisfaction with investigative agencies and judicial institutions, and it is also necessary to present a more intense opinion that the president can be subject to a violent investigation than that physical methods do not help.

[Anchor]
Today, the Senior Civil Servant Corruption Investigations Unit tried to call President Yoon Suk Yeol at 2 o'clock to investigate, but President Yoon refused. Do you think President Yoon's side sees the Senior Civil Servant Corruption Investigations Unit as illegal all the time?

[Son Jeonghye]
There are some aspects of not responding to the summons investigation because the investigation of the Senior Civil Servant Corruption Investigations Unit is illegal, but this is not the subject of the investigation at all. I think we have no choice but to say that we do not respond to the investigation because we are sticking to the position that it is not subject to judicial review. However, this series of actions that repeatedly refuse to comply with the investigation and prevent the investigation from proceeding properly are not only self-inflicted, but also likely to be very unfavorable in the process of arguing for the validity of the arrest warrant in the future, so I think it is necessary to refuse to comply with the prosecution's summons or strategically turn around.

The court has never convincingly cited arguments that they will not respond to the investigation while sticking to such a one-sided position and are not subject to judicial review. If so, I think that if I comply with the investigative agency or legal proceedings with one story and one misguided thought, this will also be a very disadvantageous effect and another self-destruct and another misjudgment.

[Anchor]
What is the view of the legal profession? Are you generally making that judgment?

[Son Jeonghye]
That's right. Because no matter how unfair I am, I have to come up to the ring and fight, but if I fall out of the ring itself and do a public opinion game, which prosecutor and which judge can respect this opinion? Furthermore, it is possible that the president himself insisted for 40 minutes that emergency martial law is not subject to punishment even for judges as it is the president's own authority. Nevertheless, an arrest warrant was issued because it was recognized that there was a criminal calling. So the attitude of accepting that it is not accepted even if you talk about it repeatedly is also respect for the judiciary within our judicial order.

However, President Yoon does not defend the constitutional order in the end when he ignores the procedure because it is not subject to judicial review. It is judged that there is no will to do so, and if so, it can be read as the behavior of the convicted criminal claimed by the investigative agency, so even if Plan A is not subject to judicial review, I think it is time to legally argue and attend the investigative agency to express my opinion in detail on the premise that Plan B is still subject to judicial review.

[Anchor]
President Yoon Suk Yeol said there was nothing more to be said by the Senior Civil Servant Corruption Investigations Unit, and expressed his intention to refuse to comply with the Senior Civil Servant Corruption Investigations Unit's investigation in the future. At the same time, he said he is considering whether to respond to the prosecution's investigation, but since the prosecution has the power to prosecute the president, it will eventually be a transfer to the prosecution. Will President Yoon Suk Yeol respond to the prosecution's investigation?

[Son Jung-hye]
It's hard to predict. The president is not expected to come out of his current position because all cases are flowing in a way that no one can predict, but hasn't it changed to a day after we changed our position and said we won't appear in the warrant review? I think that such a situation can also occur. And if you prepared 70 minutes with the PPT and argued for 40 minutes with the promotion of the president, you need to tell the investigative agency that. And it seems necessary to guarantee the president's right to defend himself that those contents remain in the suspect interrogation report. I think we have to wait and see if we will talk about that in person at the prosecution.

[Anchor]
Prior to the Senior Civil Servant Corruption Investigations Unit, he announced that he would consider forced inches and door-to-door investigations a little more. Forced Inch, is it enforceable for this part?

[Son Jeonghye]
It's legally possible. Since the Supreme Court has already interpreted that it is included in the contents of the arrest warrant as having the authority of the forced recruitment, it is generally the responsibility of the investigative agency to forcibly seek and investigate if necessary. So, it gives up its responsibility to not even forcefully seek a suspect just because he doesn't come out, and this interpretation is also possible, so we have no choice but to struggle. My personal opinion is that at a time when some people are saddened by the president's arrest, it is not necessary to consider public opinion in a way, but it is necessary to consider a visit survey from a humanitarian point of view. In particular, it seems that a lot of manpower is wasted as a security guard. If you look at it yesterday, from the perspective of ordinary citizens, traffic control is carried out every time the president attends. From tomorrow, I have to go to work and live my daily life, but I think it would be worth reviewing the visit survey rather than summoning and investigating traffic control for 30 minutes.

[Anchor]
The possibility that President Yoon will seek arrest suit is undermined because he has previously requested arrest suit, so what do you predict?


[Son Jung-hye]
is very likely to be accepted, but I believe it is very unlikely to be accepted. This is because an arrest suit is to be judged in consideration of the violation of arrest, request, or change of circumstances, but it is very difficult to change the position in a short period of time when a warrant is issued that there is no current violation of the arrest warrant. And there is no special change in circumstances because concerns about destruction of evidence have not been resolved. It is common for an arrest warrant to be maintained unless a suspect who has agreed with or denied the victim has confessed or has made such a special change in circumstances. Moreover, they do not respond to the current summons and the investigation is not conducted properly.

So, I thought that if the investigation process would go smoothly and the trial process would go smoothly when released by citing this in the arrest suit, it would be actually a very difficult process unless this concern was eliminated, but I will think about it. This is because the president will appeal that it is very difficult in reality to be in a detention center, and lawyers will try to take that into account.

[Anchor]
is likely, but the court is unlikely to accept it. Will the arrest suit be filed with the Central District Court?

[Son Jung-hye]
For now, it is judged that binding pride can be done in the west and in the center. As such, wouldn't the president choose the center rather than the west? However, what is worrisome is that if unwanted results come out, another unrest may occur. As it can be a lot of trouble in the court, I think we should punish the situation severely and strengthen the vigilance around the court.

[Anchor]
Let's also look at the reasons for issuing arrest warrants. The court decided to arrest him in consideration of the importance of the crime of rebellion, but President Yoon emphasized the legitimacy, saying it was the president's ruling act all the time. How did you judge this?

[Son Jeonghye]
This has some clear precedents. So we've had some historically significant events in the past. While talking about the theory of governing behavior, I will tell you two cases that said judicial review was not possible. The same was true of the case that a successful civil war cannot be punished on the logic that it cannot be punished, and there was a problem in the past when they argued that judicial review was not possible because it was the president's ruling act in connection with the remittance case to North Korea. At that time, the Supreme Court said that judicial review should be restrained considerably in the judgment of the Supreme Court. Nevertheless, if it is said to be declared martial law for the purpose of national constitution, and if it is clearly unconstitutional or illegal and needs to examine the legal part, the judiciary can examine it, which is rather the responsibility of the court.

This is the content of a clear en banc decision. As such, the existing order was that even if it was an act of governance, it was unconstitutional and illegal, and that it could be examined only with the power of the judiciary. You have to fight in court to change the precedents of this order. Therefore, the Supreme Court ruling must be changed in order to make a claim that contradicts the existing Supreme Court. As such, it's a matter of dispute in the court, but Minister Kim Yong-hyun said, "How can a prosecutor investigate this?" In the past, all presidents were investigated in front of prosecutors. That was also the order of our country. It is necessary to persuade the judge while respecting order, and the people who instigated public opinion and failed to read this precedent can't be mistaken, right? Because of that, I interpreted yesterday's unrest. Now that it is not the era of public opinion, but the time of the court is approaching, I think a detailed legal research and pleading strategy are needed for the dispute in the court.

[Anchor]
Court time is approaching. The court also mentioned the possibility of President Yoon's destruction of evidence. In particular, he pointed out whether the power of the people can be seen to destroy evidence simply by changing a phone.

[Son Jeonghye]
Would you have simply decided on the possibility of destroying evidence with just one phone? I can tell you that it is unfair to express it like that in a situation where it is expected how much thought and long it must have been considered, because it is a measure that lowers the authority of the court and makes the judgment of the court judge very light. By general standards, if a suspect who commits a very serious crime does not confess and denies it, the possibility of destroying evidence is left open.

If that is not exceptionally possible, the case of actively cooperating with the investigation and presenting evidence. And if all the evidence is clearly prepared, there is no possibility of destroying evidence, but even if we just talk about the cell phone now, then if we arbitrarily submit the cell phone we used before the civil war, the possibility of destroying evidence will be resolved. However, if you look at the facts connected so far, it is predicted that even if you try to get your phone or related phone through a search warrant, you will refuse it, and you have already refused it. Evidence confirming the degree of CCTV movement was not sought for cooperation and could not be received. As such, the court should respect the judgment that there is a possibility of destroying evidence. And I think this decision is reasonable in light of past precedents.

[Anchor]
If the Senior Civil Servant Corruption Investigations Unit investigates further and the prosecution indicts it, when do you expect the results of the first trial to be released in this case?

[Son Jeonghye]
It's hard to predict. Because even now, the Constitutional Court wants to do it quickly, but just as the president asks for more time on the deadline, it is difficult to rule out the possibility of various arguments when setting a pleading date or conducting a prompt trial. However, because there is an arrest deadline, you usually see it for six months. And in July and August, the summer recess usually approaches, so cases that end in the first half of the year try to be sentenced before July and August.

And if you look at former President Park Geun Hye, there were 18 charges. So, investigations and trials were conducted for a lot of crimes, so the battle was bound to be prolonged. Now, President Yoon Suk Yeol is likely to be charged with two counts of crime, so the facts are somewhat less complicated. In this regard, there seems to be a possibility of being sentenced in June and July. In some cases, I think it could go beyond summer and go until September.

[Anchor]
As a result of the YTN report, it was confirmed that if we talk about the security service, we will stay in the detention center 24 hours a day to protect them. It was Kim Sung-hoon's words, so please tell me what level of security will be carried out in the future.

[Son Jeonghye]
I'm not sure if the 24-hour resident was consulted with the detention center and the prison headquarters. First of all, isn't the purpose of security a safe service so that there is no harm to the president's body? Since I'm not a protocol secretary, I don't think I'm in a situation where I'm doing protocol, but because I'm doing safety management, I think only the minimum manpower will be put in place, and only the number of people allowed by the correction headquarters will be present. Is the main purpose of security not to be harmed by the inmate while on the move? Or maybe there will be someone's interference in the process of attending. I think the main focus will be security in these areas. However, since prison work is very important and this is also a national security facility, I hope that the primary authority to maintain order is on the prison side and that it will be well coordinated.

[Anchor]
As you explained just now, President Yoon Suk Yeol was arrested, but the security of the security service continues as he maintains his current status, and our YTN met with Kim Sung-hoon, deputy head of the security service alone. Let's hear the story for a moment.

[Anchor]
It was mentioned in the last part.It was also reported that Ma sang a song dedicated to the president, a happy birthday song, with his employees. Is this likely to be an abuse of authority or a legal problem?

[Son Jeonghye]
The possibility of abuse of authority doesn't seem high, but in general, the executive director wanted to look so good to the president at work that he took the staff below to celebrate his birthday, but these days, some MZs would say this is the right justifiable act of work. It deserves criticism because it is an act that undermines the prestige of the security service employees by excessive power abuse and excessive loyalty competition in the workplace. You can love it like that and be loyal to it personally. I think mobilizing employees will inevitably be subject to criticism.

[Anchor]
The bodyguard says nothing will change, it will be taken differently depending on the risk level, what kind of grade do you mean?

[Son Jung-hye]
I think there is a possibility that the evaluation of risk will be done according to internal regulations or existing practices. However, what is important is that the hazard rating is an evaluation of abstract risks, and until now, the Seoul Detention Center has maintained the related social order and service order by illuminating rules and related regulations inside prison guards. However, although there is a possibility of predicting risks that may arise during the president's admission, we hope that the security service will be expanded too much and that there will be conflicts with prison guards, so we hope that it will be coordinated smoothly.

[Anchor]
Separately, the Constitutional Court's judgment will continue, but the Constitutional Court has designated it collectively until the 8th anniversary on the 13th of next month, and added three more times, is there a reason?

[Son Jeonghye]
Once we have designated eight sessions and predicted the future process, it is possible that lawyers decided that setting the schedule in advance is helpful for a quick trial because they need to schedule a witness recall of the witnesses and implement these procedures rather than just summoning them. In particular, in the process, the respondent applied for additional witnesses. So I think I predicted that we need more time to plead.

[Anchor]
On the other hand, President Yoon protested that the hearing schedule was too much, saying that the president also had human rights.

[Son Jeonghye]
The Constitutional Court also rejected the objection that we had an internal meeting in accordance with precedent and that this was not too much. In the case of a number of serious cases in which we conduct intensive hearings, many people have done it twice a week and three times a week, and former President Park Geun Hye also set a hearing date twice a week to make an argument without any problems. Even if the schedule is a little overwhelming, all parties, prosecutors, and judges have to keep up with the speed around them, and even if they stay up all night to review the records and prepare procedures for witness questioning, it does not seem to fit the basic precedent.

[Anchor]
Yoon's side has continued to express its intention to focus on the impeachment trial. Therefore, since the investigation is underway, I wonder if they will insist on delaying the trial of the Constitutional Court. Daegu Mayor Hong Joon Pyo also expressed this opinion. What do you think of this?

[Son Jung-hye]
When the Constitutional Court began, lawyers argued that the Constitutional Court could suspend the Constitutional Court's judgment when criminal trials were underway, but the Constitutional Court rejected it. I don't think I will make the dismissed argument again, and even if I do, it is of no practical benefit. In short, the company won't accept it when the company asks you to postpone the disciplinary action because the investigation is underway. There is no principle of doing this first and that first because disciplinary action and criminal proceedings can go together at the same time. As such, there is no basis for arbitrating any one place for a prompt trial and a prompt trial. Even if there is a basis, I think we should respect the Constitutional Court's decision that it is unnecessary.

[Anchor]
I'll stop talking to you here. I was with lawyer Son Jung-hye. Thank you for saying that.