Acting Han Deok-soo...Female "Han Dong-hoon's Responsibility" workshop.

■ Host: Anchor Park Seok-won
■ Starring: Kim Hyung-joon, chair professor at Baejae University, 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]
With the passing of the impeachment bill of President Yoon Suk Yeol, the operation of the state administration was shifted to the acting system of Han Deok-soo.

The so-called Han Dong-hoon is responsible for the power of the people. Let's look at the contents related to Kim Hyung-joon, chair professor of Baejae University, and lawyer Seo Jeong-bin. Welcome, two of you.

First of all, the Democratic Party of Korea decided not to proceed with the impeachment process of acting representative Han Deok-soo at a press conference this morning. How do you rate this part?

[KIM HYEONGJUN]
There are few alternatives other than the acting system of Han Deok-soo, right? There are parts where you pressed too much. He simply says he will not seek impeachment, but acting Han Deok-soo is now accused of conspiracy to commit civil war. If someone raises the question of whether a person accused of conspiracy to commit civil war can act as an acting president, the Democratic Party has nothing to say. That's why I think we can think twice about the side effects that we can bring about by putting too much pressure on a situation. We should no longer shake acting Han Deok-soo with the logic of power. Didn't you say you wanted to create a national stability council? In that sense, I think it is a step in which the ruling and opposition parties seek things that can be stabilized quickly.

[Anchor]
As you said now, isn't the special police investigation team also investigating the martial law incident? It is known that Minister Song Mi-ryeong will also be investigated today, so acting Han Deok-soo should have the acting role and undergo a police investigation, right?

[Jeongbin Seo]
That's right. When a request for summons is received, there seems to be no reason to reject it. Only in the case of the president, the privilege to remove fluoride is recognized, but even in the case of the acting president, it is not possible to recognize these things, and above all, it is not a matter of prosecution, but an investigation, so there is a clear possibility that an acting president will participate in such an investigation.

[Anchor]
First of all, representative Lee Jae-myung talked to acting representative Han Deok-soo on the phone, and some pointed out that the exercise of the right to demand reconsideration is politically biased. In the end, don't veto it, do I have to interpret it in this sense?

[KIM HYEONGJUN]
There's a frank talk about how the acting president is an acting president. There is a conflict between whether to actively exercise the authority or to be limited and passive, but so far, it seems to be accepted as the norm that we should respond limitedly and passively. The reason is that, anyway, the prime minister is not a person elected by the people, so the constitution guarantees only the function of assisting the president. Therefore, I think it may be difficult to actively exercise authority on sensitive issues such as re-voting rights. If a re-decision is made, there are some areas that could be attacked by the opposition party again, so I think we have no choice but to solve this problem rationally on issues such as the appointment of a constitutional judge or the re-voting right. And I think that the idea of forming a state affairs stability consultative body that Representative Lee Jae-myung is talking about is a proposal of his own on the premise that it is not expected to cause political strife in relation to these issues.

[Anchor]
This interpretation is a passive acting president who maintains the status quo, so to what extent can the acting president exercise his or her authority?

[Jeongbin Seo]
In fact, as the professor said, the scope of the acting authority was not set according to the regulations. And there are interpretations on this, but according to most opinions, actively exercising the level of authority to change the status quo cannot be done because it has not secured democratic legitimacy. So I believe that the authority can only be exercised at the level of maintaining the status quo as much as possible. Therefore, as to whether to exercise the veto power that I am interested in now, I generally think that such an exercise of authority beyond the status quo is an exercise of authority. Of course, in the past, Prime Minister Goh Kun's acting situation, there have been cases where he has rejected some revised laws. However, given the current situations, it is difficult to veto such laws.

[Anchor]
You said that you think it is an act that goes beyond maintaining the status quo, but then should we say that there is little possibility that acting Han Deok-soo will exercise his veto power because the case of Kim Gun-hee's Special Prosecutor Act is interested?

[KIM HYEONGJUN]
That's right. However, there are bills with various issues right now, not the Kim Gun-hee Special Counsel Act. Strictly speaking, such as the National Assembly's testimony bill and the Grain Act is not politically biased, but directly connected to the economic situation we are talking about beyond state administration. In this regard, Acting President Han Deok-soo has been the prime minister for a long time, so he is well aware of how the bill was made and its own effects. In the United States, when it comes to making laws, three major things are very important. The first is whether it meets the constitutional values or not.

The second is whether there is a possibility that the effect expected by the law will be achieved, and the third is whether the budget is secured in case it is related to the budget that may occur due to the bill. I think these three things are very important. However, among the bills passed by the National Assembly at the plenary session, how much do they fit the constitutional values? If it doesn't fit, it doesn't work much, and it's expensive, I think even if it's an acting president, he can probably express his or her opinion on this and ask you to reconsider it once more.

[Anchor]
Representative Lee Jae-myung proposed a national stability consultative body with the National Assembly and the government this morning. Let's listen to CEO Lee Jae-myung's press conference this morning.

What can be done if the acting president and the opposition leader, who maintain the passive status quo, gather together to form a national stability consultative body?

[KIM HYEONGJUN]
The biggest thing is the people's livelihood problem. If you look at the announcement by the Ministry of Strategy and Finance, isn't the risk of economic downturn increasing? And furthermore, what's really unfortunate is that the second Trump administration system will be launched soon, right? There are a lot of people saying that it is a crisis in Korea, which is heavily focused on exports. including the issue of high tariffs How should we take it when the U.S. strongly promotes its own priority? What I want to ask CEO Lee Jae-myung to do is to form a national stability consultative body. Then why don't you reflect on the part related to the runaway that the opposition party has shown in the National Assembly? Didn't you do a lot of tyranny? In these areas, the opposition party should now declare that it will actively cooperate in areas that can save the company, not based on anti-business sentiment.

Furthermore, from the perspective of companies, the bills that are preventing corporate competitiveness have just been legislated, which can be a number of obstacles when the ruling and opposition parties seek to revive the economy through consultation. When we simply asked to form a government security council without talking about these things at all, it would be too abstract, so wouldn't it be just two things above all? Economic and security. When it comes to this security, we need to create our own tradition that can be dealt with in a bipartisan way. Isn't the U.S. so conflicted? Trump vs. anti-Trump. Still, what we need to learn is that we must deal with issues related to diplomacy and security in a bipartisan manner.

So when it comes to policies related to China, don't the Biden administration and the Trump administration go the same way? These parts. Last time, during the first round of impeachment, I was surprised to see value diplomacy and that it would be impeached, but I took all of it out this time. You shall not do so. So, in other words, in order to ensure the stability and security of the Republic of Korea, it is absolutely necessary to have a bipartisan attitude.

[Anchor]
In order to do that, concrete measures should also come out, so how do you expect the ruling party to react to these proposals?

[KIM HYEONGJUN]
The ruling party is out of it. This is because the ruling party is even being discussed about the collapse of the leadership system. You just have to abide by the principles. Strategy is not the problem, but responsibility must come first. So, the biggest problem in our politics right now is not the vision and the perspective of the people, but how advantageous it is for us to take this step if we implement this policy. Or what kind of support we get. Everything is buried only in strategic aspects. This is not what the people want. In such a difficult crisis, we will take responsibility and reflect on what we will take responsibility for if we really need it. Then, whether it is a stability consultative body or an economic consultative body, which Lee Jae-myung talked about a while ago. There's just a premise for that. You have to recognize each other as partners. What was the biggest defeat of the Yoon Suk Yeol government now is that it did not regard the opposition party as a partner in state administration.

There, the opposition party went to extreme struggle, and the ruling party went to the cliff of cooperation thoroughly. Since this is a political crisis that emerged from the conflict, now the ruling and opposition parties talk and compromise, and each other. The biggest power in democracy is that democracy becomes beautiful only when you presuppose that you can be wrong. So democracy should be beautiful in gray. If you go to Black and White, isn't that extreme? If you mix black and white, it turns gray. So you have to acknowledge the other person. Otherwise. So in the case of Professor Leverch, what he said is that in order for democracy to work properly, institutional restraint and mutual respect. On the premise of these two things, the National Security Council will operate. How can the National Security Council work properly when it drives the other party to the axis of evil and does not make the other party the object of conversation? In this regard, I would like to say that there are too many things to reflect on, both women and women.

[Anchor]
In the midst of this, President Yoon also unveiled his position recorded at his official residence after the impeachment yesterday. The statement was released immediately after the approval, so let's listen to the contents of President Yoon's statement. I will never give up. In the end, it sounds like you will leave it to the Constitutional Court's judgment, but what are the future procedures?

[Jeongbin Seo]
The current acting system has begun, and the Constitutional Court will conclude the impeachment trial within 180 days according to the relevant regulations. To be more specific, there may be three or four preparation dates before the pleading date, and here we have a procedure to organize such facts, such as arranging issues about the contents to proceed in the future. After that, the hearing date is held, and through several hearing dates, a decision is made to ultimately decide whether to impeach within 180 days.

[Anchor]
How did you hear it, professor?

[KIM HYEONGJUN]
I was a little surprised when I saw that at first. I thought the apple would come out first. In any case, I have to make a sincere apology first for the impeachment, but I will never give up right away. Talking about it makes me wonder if such a conversation is necessary. Rather, I personally think that it may have had an adverse effect on strengthening the people's antipathy toward President Yoon Suk Yeol. So on December 7th, I apologized three times in the public statement. If it was approved in that extension, I personally thought that it was not at all in line with the public's eye level in this regard or the timing of the election, to the extent that it was a little strange to talk about it when he declared the presidential election without all of it.

[Anchor]
The second impeachment has now been passed, and if you look at the second impeachment, which was submitted by the Democratic Party, didn't you use rebellion as a key reason? It is said that the Constitutional Court's judgment may be a little faster in this regard, but how do you interpret this?

[Jeongbin Seo]
I think that's more likely and that's what I meant. The more reasons for impeachment, the more time it takes for the Constitutional Court to judge it, and especially now, President Yoon is actively presenting his arguments in impeachment or later criminal cases, so the more reasons there are, the more time it will take for the Constitutional Court to judge it. Therefore, the impeachment motion is as clear and important as possible. So, I think there was an intention to include only this emergency martial law incident in the prosecution and to be judged later.

[Anchor]
The faster the Constitutional Court's judgment is, the more advantageous it is for Lee Jae-myung, who has judicial risks, and the longer it goes, the more advantageous it is for the president's office. Do you think there's a possibility of dragging your feet?

[KIM HYEONGJUN]
I want to emphasize it in two ways. Emergency martial law should never exist. Because martial law is now called an act of governance without meeting martial law requirements, and martial law is an act of governance. Then it should be martial law at the legal level, but can it be said that it is an act of governance when martial law is unconstitutional and illegal? The problem with the various controversies being discussed in that regard is that it eventually destroys constitutional values and is unconstitutional. Then most of them are talking about the fact that emergency martial law is unconstitutional. It will be controversial later whether it is a crime of rebellion or not. This should then be pointed out clearly about the various unconstitutional opposition parties' actions in the National Assembly. Now the president is impeached, isn't he? The impeachment of the president does not justify the tyranny of the opposition party in the National Assembly. I want to point out that. Second, what the opposition party is doing now is demanding a quick trial by the Constitutional Court.

Then, why don't you ask for a quick trial against representative Lee Jae-myung? If it's the same logic. Why? We need to reduce the uncertainty. The people have the right to know. Therefore, the Constitutional Court must also make a quick trial and make sure to do things related to representative Lee Jae-myung quickly. So the 633 that the Chief Justice of the Supreme Court mentioned is not a voluntary rule. It's a compulsory rule.

If so, the lower court ruling is over now, so it's March or three months later, February and May. Until May, the court and the Constitutional Court will hold a trial as soon as possible. And we need to quickly conclude representative Lee Jae-myung's trial at the same time and then give the people what they can judge. If only the Constitutional Court is tried quickly and for example, representative Lee Jae-myung's trial continues to be delayed, can that be fair? At the same time, he does it according to the principle of presumption of innocence. Then get a speedy trial. Then, if you are innocent, you can go to the presidential election.

However, the problem now is that if an early presidential election is made without being confirmed, various legitimacy problems may arise. Isn't it okay to compare this to Trump in the case of the United States? You can't do this. So, I would like to say that regardless of what form I claim, those who have power and those who have power should not exercise them unconstitutionally, and that an equal and prompt trial should be made quickly.

[Anchor]
The trial must be made quickly now. That's what he said.There is a clause in Article 52 of the Constitutional Court Act, which means that the prosecution and police are investigating within the power of the people and in some parts of the president's office, and there is a clause that the Constitutional Court's judgment can be postponed a little after prosecution. There are also observations that the Constitutional Court's judgment may be delayed further after this provision is applied, so how do you interpret this?

[Jeongbin Seo]
First of all, as you said, this regulation stipulates that if the president undergoes a criminal trial for the same reason as impeachment, the impeachment proceedings can be suspended. Therefore, I think there is a possibility that there is such a regulation, but in the end, this regulation is a discretionary regulation, and the Constitutional Court can decide whether to suspend it or not. But in this situation, will the Constitutional Court really suspend the criminal trial because it is in progress? I think it's too urgent to make such a judgment, so I think it's unlikely that this will actually happen, and what's comparable is actually not the same in the case of former President Park Geun Hye's impeachment in the past. Although it was not my own criminal trial, there was a similar argument regarding the suspension because the criminal trial of the accomplices involved was underway. However, even at that time, the Constitutional Court did not suspend the trial process, and even when comparing these situations, I think that this regulation will not stop the trial process.

[Anchor]
The Constitutional Court now has a nine-member system, but it is now a six-member system. Three people have been recommended and can the appointment be completed within this year, so within this month?

[KIM HYEONGJUN]
It's highly likely. I understand that you are also scheduling a hearing now. Two people recommended by the opposition party and one recommended by the ruling party. If that happens, I think the hearing schedule will proceed quickly. After the hearing schedule is over, the acting president exercises that part in relation to personnel rights. If you look at it in the past, there have been exercises related to personnel rights. So for this part, until the end of ten. The reason is that it is possible to deliberate with a six-member system, but it is difficult to make a decision, so there is a quick normalization so that a quick and fair trial can take place there. As I said earlier, the Constitutional Law says it can be suspended, but it is not a compulsory regulation that must be suspended. However, since Korea does not comply with compulsory regulations, that may be a problem, but the fact that it can be suspended means that the Constitutional Court has enough discretion to deal with it.

[Anchor]
But shouldn't acting Han Deok-soo be appointed, even if it's recommended by the National Assembly? The authority of acting Han Deok-soo for the appointment itself. Do you think it's more than a passive authority?

[KIM HYEONGJUN]
I don't think so. Isn't the procedure clear because this is not appointed by the president, for example, or by the recommendation of the ruling and opposition parties, not by the constitutional judge appointed by the Chief Justice of the Supreme Court? So I went through the parliamentary process, so is there any reason to postpone it? If it is postponed, I think it will be appointed quickly through the hearing process because there are conflicting parts of what Representative Lee Jae-myung said just a moment ago that there should be no political bias.

[Anchor]
On the other hand, there is a slight possibility of an early presidential election, and Lee Joon-seok, a member of the New Reform Party, said that he intends to run for president if the early presidential election is held after the end of January. How did you like it?

[KIM HYEONGJUN]
Everyone can run. However, according to the current situation, the ruling party became a division right after the impeachment of President Park Geun Hye in 2016. So the Bareun Party was formed, and in the end, the election was held under a five-party system at that time, right? So, candidate Moon Jae In was elected. It's the same. If you look at it now, the ruling party could be divided. Is there a guarantee that the opposition party will not necessarily be divided? It is said to be a perfect one-way system now, but if the second trial related to the Lee Jae-myung Election Act comes out in February and March and says that the right to run for election will be deprived, can we continue with Lee Jae-myung's system?

Of course, if that's the case, other competitors are likely to talk about a plan B, so if it causes conflict, there are parts that can be divided again, so it's hard to predict what will happen in a month in Korean politics. However, if progressives and conservatives are made, conservatives are now toward the power of the people, but there is a possibility that the two parties can be reasonable in the end. So, there may be parts where lawmaker Lee Joon-seok comes in and wants to unify the pan-conservative candidates, so I think everyone wants to run as presidential candidates. It's about how much it's supported by the people, but isn't the presence of the New Reform Party not that big these days? In that sense, the possibility of running is very high because the age is not that high, but rather, the desire to continue to promote oneself and look at the future is very strong.

[Anchor]
According to CEO Lee Joon-seok's story, he is 39 years old now because he is eligible to run for president only when he is over 40 years old. I was born in March, so if the presidential election is held in January next year, I can't go out because I have an age limit, but if it is held after March, I think he said that he is eligible.

[KIM HYEONGJUN]
However, it was a simple case during the impeachment of President Roh Moo Hyun. At that time, he asked me to actively support the Uri Party, so I was caught under the official letter law, but the impeachment period was 63 days. Even though it was that simple, it took 91 days for President Park Geun Hye. So, they ask if it's two or three months, but if you do it for about three months, there are parts that could be March. But many people think the Constitutional Court will end early, but I have a different view. Because it's very likely that legal arguments will conflict and they have different arguments in their own way, I don't know. I don't know because I'm not from the legal profession, but whether this is a crime of rebellion or not. However, in relation to the national constitutional controversy in the criminal law, when we block the state institution established by the Constitution through physical force or prevent the authority, for example, it falls under the national constitutional controversy. Aren't there two crimes of rebellion?

There are two kinds of problems, which are the state-owned land and the state-owned land, and even if there was no land deprivation, there is a very high possibility that it could fall under the state-owned land. I think there will be a fierce legal debate over the fact that it is an act of governance in itself, so even if this may take longer than you think, if you look at the case of President Park Geun Hye, it takes about 90 days, about 3 months. And since it's two months later, if you talk about it easily until May, it's divided into cherry blossoms, roses, or heat waves. So, in general, there are many people who predict that the presidential election in May will take place like last time.

[Anchor]
And today, the prosecution also requested an arrest warrant for Kwak Jong-geun, commander of the Army Special Warfare Command, who deployed troops such as the 707 Special Task Force to the National Assembly. Please tell me in detail what the charges were.

[Jeongbin Seo]
In the case of former Special Warfare Commander Kwak, he has already been investigated by the prosecution as a reference on the 9th. However, this time, he is accused of rebellion and abuse of authority. So, he became a suspect, was summoned for investigation, and an arrest warrant was requested. Therefore, the charges that former commander Kwak is now facing regarding the civil war were sent to the National Assembly or the Central Election Commission at the time of martial law. He is under investigation for such charges, and in fact, he has received a mission related to martial law from former Minister Kim Yong-hyun even before that point. Or even at the time of martial law, even after the declaration of martial law, the president ordered people to pull out because the quorum of votes did not seem to have been filled in the National Assembly. These are also being investigated. If a warrant is issued, the investigation is expected to continue.

[Anchor]
In the last presidential statement, didn't the troops sent to the National Assembly for fear of hurting citizens to maintain order in the National Assembly? But if you see former commander Kwak's statement, quickly break the door and bring out the lawmaker, what kind of investigation should be done to prove this contradictory claim?

[Jeongbin Seo]
In the end, each statement is first asked whether each statement is credible and whether there are any contradictions in the content, and in the end, the question of which statement is more reliable is circumstantial or whether the statements of other parties are more consistent and consistent. That's why we make a comprehensive judgment on which side is more reliable given the circumstances of the time, whether there are other officials' statements that match the president's claims, or if not, those statements that former commander Kwak is making.

[Anchor]
What do you think? If you look at the testimony of various military officials now, there are a lot of statements that contradict President Yoon Suk Yeol's public statement.

[KIM HYEONGJUN]
We will have a fierce legal debate with that part. As the lawyer said just a moment ago, isn't there a lot of testimony coming out in general? It's very important whether consistent testimony comes out from there. Kwak Jong-geun, commander of the Special Forces Command, and the arrested police chief said he received the phone number 6, and there are some parts that match what he did then. And in that way, as you said, I don't know why you broke the window of the National Assembly and tried to do a physical event, for example. Because it's not a legal profession. Is it possible because martial law was declared in itself? Or there are parts that are bound to collide with whether this is a matter of motivation or behavior. From various circumstances, I think it is known so far that there are many testimonies that conflict with what the president has said so far.

[Anchor]
Yesterday, the prosecution arrested Yeo In-hyeong, commander of the National Defense Command, and today Lee Jin-woo, commander of the Capital Defense Command, was investigated by the prosecution. Here, commander Lee made a statement to the effect that the president ordered him to be pulled out, but he's also going to seek an arrest warrant, right?

[Jeongbin Seo]
That's right. In the case of Commander Lee Jin-woo, he will seek an arrest warrant in the future while being arrested. In the end, he is accused of putting his subordinate troops into the National Assembly during martial law. In fact, it is not only related to this, but also to the situation that they were trying to detain key people in the B1 bunker if they were arrested, so these areas are expected to be investigated, and the arrest warrant is scheduled to be requested today, so if it is late, we can see the results late today or early tomorrow morning.

[Anchor]
Former Minister Kim Yong-hyun is refusing to make a statement while being investigated by the prosecution. How will it affect future trials on this part?

[Jeongbin Seo]
First of all, if you refuse to make a statement about the allegations at all, the investigation may be delayed a little because there is no statement of your own that can be important evidence in admitting the allegations. Of course, if there is enough evidence to replace it other than that statement, there will be no difference in time even if the right to reject the statement is exercised, but if it is a little insufficient, it is thought that refusing to make a statement could be a time-consuming setback for the investigation, and of course, this does not end up alone, and if so, the allegations can be sufficiently proved by considering the statements of those involved. I think that's enough. On the other hand, the defense minister suggested martial law to the president, and in this situation, he was delegated to implement it. This can be an important statement not only about his case but also about the president's future investigation, but he refuses to do so, so if the investigation into the president continues, the investigation could be disrupted.

[Anchor]
Now, the Criminal Investigation Office of high-ranking government officials is asking the prosecution and the police to transfer the case in relation to the emergency martial law incident. It looks like it needs to be sorted out.

[KIM HYEONGJUN]
According to the Corruption Investigations Unit Act, it is correct to transfer. Because when the courts issue warrants, in many places... I think they'll be brought together as an independent counsel. Anyway, it is the Senior Civil Servant Corruption Investigations Unit, prosecutors, and police, but if the special prosecutor works in its own way, all the investigations can be unified into the special prosecutor. Special Prosecutor Park Young-soo led everything during the impeachment of President Park Geun Hye in 2016.

Although the prosecution was investigating at the time. Likewise, it has no choice but to be sorted out in that way, and since representative Lee Jae-myung also says that a special prosecutor is needed for a quick investigation, isn't this a problem that can be solved naturally through procedures? However, the fatal weakness for President Yoon Suk Yeol is that it is supposed to be deliberated by the State Council, and there is a high possibility that there will be a debate about whether it has been deliberated by the State Council.

Now acting Han Deok-soo also testified that there was actually no form of a cabinet meeting. And now the foreign minister is expressing his opinions individually, and some members of the State Council couldn't talk because the time was not right at all. If there is a part of whether it is a Cabinet meeting, I think it is very likely to act as a fatal weakness for President Yoon Suk Yeol because all subsequent parts are denied if they have not been deliberated by the Cabinet.

[Anchor]
The Constitutional Court's judgment of President Yoon is drawing attention, but there are many people who are curious about the future of representative Han Dong-hoon. What's going to happen?

[KIM HYEONGJUN]
The Han Dong-hoon system has no choice but to go to the level of collapse, right? This is because there are five elected supreme council members under the Party Constitutional Party regulations, and if four of them resign, they automatically move on to the emergency committee system. However, I don't know why there is such a regulation, but what happens under the party constitution rules is that if the party leader refuses to resign, the chairman of the emergency committee can be appointed by the leader. This is the part, and even now, the pressure on the representative to resign is very strong, and I think CEO Han Dong-hoon will probably have some things to reflect on in his own way. Why did Rep. Jang Dong-hyuk or Rep. Jin Jong-oh, who were so close to each other, suddenly resign? That's a great puzzle right now. They say there are questions, but there must have been a closed general meeting of lawmakers after the impeachment.

But when I heard from the lawmakers who participated in the general meeting, they said there was a very heated response. For example, CEO Han Dong-hoon said, "I didn't vote for you, but you voted for me." I blocked martial law, who declared martial law. As we talked about it in this way, the conflict was very strong in its own way, and it was said to resign. Then, after attending the general assembly, I met with reporters again and said, "I did my best," and there were parts that really stimulated the lawmakers. As a result, public opinion was very prevalent that they were too complacent about their responsibilities as representatives, and I understand that when lawmakers asked the top member of their close circle what you were going to do, they said they would quit on the spot. As such, in a crisis situation, a political leader's words, actions, and messages must be very careful. However, since those parts were overlooked a little, I don't think it will be easy for CEO Han Dong-hoon to hold out until the end.

[Anchor]
I see. Let's stop here. So far, we have been with Kim Hyung-joon, chair professor of Baejae University, and Seo Jeong-bin, two lawyers. Thank you.