The second recall of President Yoon... controversy over 'mocking martial law at a hamburger restaurant'

■ Host: Anchor Yoon Bori
■ Starring: Lawyer Seo Jeong-bin

* The text below may differ from the actual broadcast content, so please check the broadcast for more accurate information. Please specify [YTN Newswide] when quoting.

[Anchor]
12.3 The investigation into allegations of rebellion related to the emergency martial law incident is being conducted from various angles. The Constitutional Court's impeachment trial process has also begun. Let's point out various legal issues with lawyer Seo Jeong-bin. How are you?

[Jeongbin Seo]
How are you?

[Anchor]
Let's first look at the investigation into the alleged rebellion. The Joint Investigation Headquarters notified President Yoon to attend on the 25th. But since this day is Christmas, it's a holiday. Is there a reason why you chose it as a holiday?

[Jeongbin Seo]
In fact, I haven't made anything clear, but I think I designated it as a holiday in consideration of the smoothness of the investigation. Currently, the Senior Civil Servant Corruption Investigations Unit is located in Gwacheon Government Complex. Therefore, it is a place where various government agencies other than the Senior Civil Servant Corruption Investigations Unit operate, so if you conduct an investigation on weekdays, it will be a little difficult because there are so many Senior Civil Servant Corruption Investigations Unit.

Therefore, if you attend, the investigation time will be longer, but if you proceed on weekdays, security issues or control will become quite difficult, so I think you can see it like this as a holiday to avoid such things.

[Anchor]
The prosecution has already requested attendance twice and once in the joint investigation, but President Yoon is not responding. It will be difficult to avoid continuing to attend, but this is the fourth time. What do you think of this attendance?

[Jeongbin Seo]
Given the responses so far and lawyer Seok Dong-hyun's positions, there seem to be many opinions that he will not respond until this time. Of course, I don't know what will happen in the future, but it seems that President Yoon's side will have such logic to defend against it even if he refuses to attend this time.

For example, it is difficult for President Yoon to choose one of them because investigative agencies have notified attendance in several places at the same time so far. In particular, it may be argued that it was not possible to respond to this because there was a problem with who had the right to investigate and the subject of this right to investigate.

On the other hand, as I have argued so far, the formation of the lawyers has not been completed, so I think it would be difficult to attend on the 25th considering the situation so far. However, the longer this period, the higher the possibility of issuing such arrest warrants that can be forced to arrest later.

[Anchor]
But now, President Yoon is continuously not receiving the attendance request itself. There are also criticisms such as whether this is a trick to delay the legal process, what do you think of this part?

[Jeongbin Seo]
In fact, it can be seen as a delay. However, the purpose of the delay will be important, but in the end, it seems that time is secured to prepare the defense as much as possible. The charges that the president is currently facing are very serious charges of rebellion, and this is a situation in which officials' statements are announced every day at investigative agencies. Therefore, President Yoon strongly denies the allegations of civil war, and if so, he will be thinking of securing as much preparation time as possible and conducting an investigation.

In particular, if there are any contradictions in the initial statement or other investigations are conducted later to reveal evidence contrary to the initial statement, that can be another difficult point in proceeding with the argument later, so I will first secure as much time as possible to prepare for the argument and then proceed with the investigation later. Since this position seems to be the position, I think this delay purpose is to prepare more thoroughly for the argument.

[Anchor]
In addition to preparing for the defense, some say that there is a little more delay for the public opinion battle of the supporters.

[Jeongbin Seo]
I think you can see it like that. In fact, there are two cases going on right now, one is a criminal case and the other is an impeachment trial. In criminal cases, evidence is ultimately the most important issue, and the court will judge it with such evidence if it is prosecuted later, so it cannot be said that it is directly related to this. However, in the case of an impeachment trial, legal issues are also considered in determining whether or not the president should admit the reason for impeachment, but the political situation is also considered, and if so, how public opinion is flowing can be an important issue.
That's why President Yoon may need time to secure a little more time, check public opinion, and lead public opinion to a little more advantage.

[Anchor]
In addition, there are criticisms that these appearances are very contradictory to President Yoon's statement, which said that he would do his legal and political responsibility in relation to the current situation. How do you see it?

[Jeongbin Seo]
Of course, such criticism seems to be possible. Since we have decided to take such responsibility, we can criticize it as soon as possible, saying, "Isn't it necessary to respond to these procedures that are going on later?" On the other hand, I will actually take that responsibility, legal and political. So, the meaning of taking responsibility for future criminal cases or conclusions at the impeachment trial is another matter from the fact that I will admit everything in this investigation process. So the conclusion is that I'll admit it, and I'll take responsibility, but I'll argue enough in the process.
So if I interpret it in that respect, of course, criticism is possible, but I think it may be understandable to take this much time to prepare for the defense.

[Anchor]
We asked President Yoon to come out on the 25th to the Gwacheon Government Complex, where the Senior Civil Servant Corruption Investigations Unit is located, but is there a possibility that he will be investigated elsewhere other than the Gwacheon Government Complex?

[Jeongbin Seo]
That may be enough. In particular, since he is the president, it may seem a little unfair or inappropriate to attend an investigative agency and do an investigation. In particular, because security problems may arise, it is possible to request a change in the location of such an investigation, and the location of such an investigation is not legally regulated and enforced, so if consultation is possible, the location of the investigation is likely to be changed.

[Anchor]
So, is there no legal issue in this case?

[Jeongbin Seo]
That's right. There is no particular legal problem when it comes to setting the location.

[Anchor]
However, if President Yoon fails to comply with the summons this time, the Joint Chiefs of Staff may issue an arrest warrant. He expressed this nuance, and he said there were other conditions for requesting and issuing an arrest warrant.

[Jeongbin Seo]
That's right. It is similar to the case of an arrest warrant request, but first, when there is considerable reason to suspect that the suspect has committed a crime, and the other is that he or she does not comply with the request for attendance. In this way, an arrest warrant is issued when the need for arrest is recognized.

If the government requests a warrant, it will point out the reason that it did not comply with the request for attendance several times. You can request an arrest warrant for that reason, but as I said earlier, investigative agencies have not been organized in President Yoon's view.

Therefore, there was a simultaneous request for investigation, and as a result, it was impossible to accurately determine where I should go as a suspect, and I could not respond to this. You can also make a claim like this.

On the other hand, it is possible to defend itself by saying that time was needed for the composition of other lawyers, so if you emphasize that you did not attend when an arrest warrant was requested at this point, you may be issued that way, but if you look at the circumstances so far, especially in the case of the president, you can judge that it is necessary to guarantee sufficient defense rights against it because he is the head of the government unlike other people involved. So, if you look at this, you might think that the possibility of an arrest warrant is relatively low.

[Anchor]
In addition, if the Senior Civil Servant Corruption Investigations Unit makes an arrest, it must be prosecuted within 20 days, so it will not be easy to issue an arrest warrant in the current situation because the Senior Civil Servant Corruption Investigations Unit has not been formed as a special prosecutor. What about this part?

[Jeongbin Seo]
Of course, I think that's something to think about. As you said, if you make an arrest with a warrant, the investigative agency can only arrest you for up to 20 days. Of course, on the premise that it leads to arrest. But we have to decide whether to prosecute it or not. From the standpoint of President Yoon's strong refutation of the allegation, will the investigation take place during that period? So I think we can clearly think about the timing of whether there will be an indictment in it.

If that doesn't happen, in the current situation, the prosecution should prosecute it, but since the investigation has been conducted quite competitively so far, the prosecution should prosecute it again due to such a point of view. So, I think I will consider the situation of the investigation so far and when the prosecution can be decided when the investigation proceeds in the future, and eventually consider requesting a warrant.

[Anchor]
Despite this situation, if an arrest warrant is issued for President Yoon, he is still the incumbent president. Is it legally possible to get a compulsory arrest?

[Jeongbin Seo]
First of all, it's possible for the president to get an arrest warrant like this from the court and execute it. Of course, the president has the privilege of fluoridation, but the charge in question now includes the exception of the charge of rebellion, and the warrant was eventually issued through the court, so there is no problem in terms of procedural or legal content. That's why if the warrant is eventually issued, there's no problem until it's legally enforced.

[Anchor]
Currently, in the case of search and seizure by investigative agencies, the presidential security service is strongly opposed, so it is not possible to enter now. By the way, can the security service prevent the execution of an arrest warrant?

[Jeongbin Seo]
In the case of seizure and search, under the Criminal Procedure Act, when confiscating confidential items related to the duties of the public office, even if a warrant is issued, the execution can be carried out only with the consent of the public office's head. Therefore, it was a little difficult for the Security Service to proceed with the previous search and seizure because of such ground rules, but unlike that, there is no reason for such restriction in the execution of such an arrest warrant.

Therefore, it is correct to see that there is virtually no basis for the security service to prevent these things, but in reality, it is a realistic problem regardless of the law that the security service interferes with or creates a setback in enforcement, so there will be some concerns about that.

[Anchor]
If President Yoon earlier said he could not attend because he has not yet formed a defense team, but he keeps asking for this reason and asking for more time, what will happen to the procedure afterwards?

[Jeongbin Seo]
First of all, it is true that the most important thing in the defense rights of the accused or the suspect is the right to receive assistance from a lawyer. Therefore, if President Yoon claims that time is needed to form a defense team, of course, the argument itself is not wrong.

However, I can understand and accept this point in the collaborative edition to some extent, but I will not accept it indefinitely. So, for example, even if you postpone your attendance for a certain period of time and adjust it, let's complete the formation of the defense team in the meantime and proceed with the investigation. Of course, this period will not be long given the situation so far. However, even in this argument, so far, it seems that there may be a story to coordinate a new schedule and complete the formation of a defense team in the meantime.

[Anchor]
Seok Dong-hyun, one of President Yoon's lawyers, says that there was no order to arrest a lawmaker. Nevertheless, if you look at the testimony, there is a continuous mention that there was an order for the arrest of a lawmaker. How do we trust these testimonies?

[Jeongbin Seo]
First of all, if the accomplices' statements are consistent, they can be quite reliable. In the current situation, Lee Jin-woo, commander of the water defense command, Kwak Jong-geun, and Chief of the National Police Agency, Jo Ji-ho, are making common statements to the effect that there was an order to arrest or drag down lawmakers at the time. As these statements are the statements of these people who are suspected of being accomplices in the end of this civil war, their consensus claims are likely to be judged to be quite reliable.

However, on the other hand, there are cases where these people make statements to transfer responsibility to such accomplices that there are accomplices underneath, for example, in cases where there are accomplices. Therefore, it should be judged again whether this is a statement that is different from the facts for transfer of responsibility.

So, if it goes to trial later, the witnesses will eventually be questioned about these people, and the specific statements of those people coming out of court, these will eventually be the most important things for the judge to see and judge their credibility.

[Anchor]
However, the president claims that he has never given such an order, but anyway, the president's sentencing will change a little depending on how far the direct order has been made. What's going to happen?

[Jeongbin Seo]
Of course it is. This part is likely to be related to whether or not the crime of rebellion is established before considering the sentencing. If it is judged that there was an order to arrest a lawmaker, the contents of what the president has said so far will be refuted, and the purpose of such a national constitution that tried to paralyze the function of the National Assembly will be recognized.

And on the other hand, if there was no such order, on the other hand, President Yoon's argument can be reinforced to some extent. In this way, first of all, confirming this fact may be a matter directly related to whether or not the crime of rebellion is established. Furthermore, if such a crime of rebellion was judged to be established, how far were they involved, and to what extent were there specific instructions, this part could be a significant variable in sentencing depending on the difference.

[Anchor]
In any case, there is no record of President Yoon. So what legal evidence could there be to support the statement?

[Jeongbin Seo]
In fact, there are claims that there was such an order through non-phone phones or security phones, but due to the nature of such phones, it is not expected that the call details are recorded, but it may be important whether the actual call details exist at the time. For example, in the case of Police Commissioner Jo Chi-ho, he reportedly said that there were six arrest orders at the time.

However, if such details are confirmed at the time, it can be an important evidence to reinforce the credibility of Commissioner Jo Ji-ho's statement, so it seems to be a very important issue whether this call details are secured in the end.

[Anchor]
It is said that securing a server is the key to securing this call history. But is it possible to seize and search major confidential facilities?

[Seo Jeongbin]
In principle, it is legally possible, but if this is related to official secrets, the consent of the person in charge of management is required. That's why it was difficult to proceed with the seizure and search earlier. However, if additional search and seizure are actually carried out on this, if Prime Minister Han Deok-soo, who is currently acting as an acting authority, agrees on this, the search and seizure can be carried out sufficiently, and if there is no agreement on it, I think it will be difficult to proceed as before.

[Anchor]
However, in this situation, the prosecution has seized and searched the National Investigation Headquarters. At the time of the martial law declaration, Woo Jong-soo, head of the National Investigation Headquarters, was involved in the formation of a group of politicians' arrests. Director Woo is saying that he instructed not to give the list.

[Jeongbin Seo]
First of all, it is known that at the time of the emergency martial law, the counterintelligence made two demands to Kook Soo-bon. One thing is that when martial law is implemented and martial law is formed, please prepare 100 investigators to participate in the joint investigation headquarters. And another thing is that they asked for two things, asking for a police list that can guide martial law troops who are currently dispatched to the National Assembly.

Regarding this, it is true that the police provided a list of 10 people in Yeongdeungpo-gu at the time, but Woo Jong-soo, the head of the headquarters, belatedly criticized the report. And I ordered him to never respond to a request to prepare 100 investigators, which was one of the two previous requests.

[Anchor]
It is known that Director Woo's mobile phone was confiscated at the same time, so can the relevant evidence come out if we look at the phone call details?

[Jeongbin Seo]
Of course, it seems difficult to produce direct evidence, but it seems that evidence to know the situation at the time can be obtained indirectly. So, I think we can estimate when the head of the division received the relevant report through phone details at the time, or if there are any messages left, we can find out that situation again.

However, we believe that Yeongdeungpo-seo's statement that the list was sent at the time or that it was requested by the counterintelligence agency are also necessary evidence to confirm the facts.

[Anchor]
As the situation becomes like this, some say that the conflict between the prosecution and the police will arise following the conflict of investigative rights between the prosecution and the police. How do you see it?

[Jeongbin Seo]
That's right. First of all, the prosecution said that the search was carried out because of such suspicions because the National Assembly was involved in the formation of the so-called arrest group, while the National Assembly and the police strongly expressed regret about this.

Therefore, there is a clear possibility that the conflict between the two sides will intensify in the future. If Woo Jong-soo, the current head of the headquarters, was raided as a reference, and the prosecution turned him into a suspect and launched a direct investigation, the conflict is highly likely to intensify.

[Anchor]
On the other hand, it was revealed that Kim Bong-sik, the head of the Seoul Metropolitan Police Agency, who was sent to custody, and Kim Yong-hyun, the former defense minister, were contacted just before martial law was declared. Can you explain this part?

[Jeongbin Seo]
That's right. At the time, I knew it was originally scheduled for 10 o'clock, but I got a call from former Minister Kim again, and I received a call saying that the previously scheduled declaration of martial law was delayed and delayed a little. In the end, these contents further support the situation that there was a discussion about martial law in advance.

What is most problematic now is that there was such unconstitutional martial law prohibiting the activities of the National Assembly at the time, and officials who knew in advance that martial law would be declared were fully aware of such unconstitutionality. If so, I knew about the unconstitutional martial law in advance, about such content. And I knew about the progress going forward.

Nevertheless, if it was implemented after the actual martial law was declared, it could eventually be a factor in fully recognizing the unconstitutionality of this martial law and even admitting the charge of rebellion. So, although there have been statements about receiving these instructions from the safe house earlier, it is expected to be treated as an important part of these criminal proceedings in the future.

[Anchor]
In addition, there is a controversy over those who are discharged from the military as civilians. Now, so-called hamburger restaurant meetings have been mentioned, and Roh Sang-won, former intelligence commander, was nominated as a secret line for former Defense Minister Kim Yong-hyun. But this time, it's been revealed that it wasn't just one meeting at a hamburger restaurant, right?

[Jeongbin Seo]
That's right. It was known that on December 1, two days before the martial law, Roh, Moon Sang-ho, and two colonel gathered to discuss martial law-related matters in advance, including securing the NEC server, but on November 30, a day before that, Roh had a solo meeting with former Defense Minister Kim Yong-hyun. It is also known that on the day of martial law, a so-called hamburger meeting was held with military officials.

[Anchor]
Regarding this incident, there were even rumors that it was a secret martial law, but there are suspicions that Kim Yong-hyun was trying to set up a private investigation team through former commander Roh Sang-won, right?

[Jeongbin Seo]
That's right. As it turns out, one of the people who participated in the hamburger meeting at the time is Colonel Kim, who is unusually from the military police department. So, it can be seen as a so-called investigation expert, but if martial law is established after declaring martial law while sharing these details at the time, this suspicion is raised that they were trying to form a separate structure related to this investigation that was not in the system.

[Anchor]
However, it is said that he secured a notebook at the former commander Roh Sang-won's home, and it is said that there was a plan to deploy a certain military unit in the National Assembly and the NEC. I think this part could be the main evidence, what do you think?

[Jeongbin Seo]
That's right. Of course, this can be an important piece of evidence. In the end, the contents of this notebook are evidence that can at least indirectly prove that there was a conspiracy in relation to martial law. Therefore, as long as it is recognized that it is written by oneself, the contents that can be revealed by this and such proof power are expected to be quite high, so I think it will be used as important evidence in future trials.

[Anchor]
It is said that martial law is supposed to be punished even if it does not go to execution and only if it is simulated.

[Jeongbin Seo]
In fact, martial law itself cannot be punished even if it is simulated. It is admitted that this is a conspiracy of martial law, but if these are not recognized as a rebellion in the end, or even if this martial law is not recognized as a rebellion, the fact that the martial law was planned alone cannot be legally punished, so whether or not it can be punished with this can only be dealt with if the crime of rebellion is established.

[Anchor]
Then, what kind of punishment can be legally imposed on the conspiracy of civilian dischargeers this time?

[Jeongbin Seo]
In the end, this can also be talked about on the premise that the entire martial law is later found guilty of rebellion. If that premise is not established, the conspiracy itself cannot punish it. So, if we talk about this premise, in the end, former intelligence commander Roh Sang-won and others or officials can also be charged as accomplices of rebellion.

And if the facts revealed so far are true, former commander Roh can at least be considered to be a person engaged in important duties, and if so, he can be severely punished. Of course, it is a matter to consider what specific role the other participants played, but at least if this fact is correct, former commander Roh could be punished for rebellion.

[Anchor]
Let's move on to the impeachment trial. President Yoon has not received documents related to the impeachment trial for five consecutive days. The Constitutional Court is scheduled to hold the first hearing on the 27th, so will there be any delay in the process?

[Seo Jung-bin]
The Constitutional Court has announced that it has no plans to change the originally scheduled date for the 27th hearing. However, if the state of non-delivering continues like this, it seems that there will be difficulties in proceeding with such a hearing preparation period. Therefore, I understand that the Constitutional Court is also reviewing how to prepare for such a non-deliverable situation.

[Anchor]
What kind of judgment can the Constitutional Court make legally in this situation?

[Jeongbin Seo]
What's being talked about now seems to be looking at the current situation and reviewing whether it can be considered to have been served. Therefore, the Constitutional Court is now reviewing these parts, such as whether it can be regarded as being immediately served when posting the website or sending registered mail, and whether it can be regarded as a situation in which the current situation is served.

[Anchor]
I don't think it seems advantageous in the impeachment trial to be creaking from the sending of documents like this. How can I see this?

[Jeongbin Seo]
First of all, so far, it seems a little hard to say that this will necessarily work against the referee. This is because the hearing preparation period has not yet been held, and the fact that the documents are not received like this does not mean that they will be subject to judgment again.

For example, even if you compare it to a criminal trial, you sent a notice of attendance before the first trial, but if it continues to be delayed, it will not have a negative impact on the trial. Therefore, this situation continues to be repeated even though it does not seem to affect the hearing so far, and if this shows an intention to delay this hearing, I think the judges will eventually consider this part and judge it.

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