Mrs. Kim's independent counsel law is out of 4 votes...The ruling party's 'exit strategy' is considered.

■ Host: Kim Sun-young Anchor
■ Starring: Kim Ki-heung, former vice spokesperson for the president's office, Jang Hyun-joo, former vice chairman of the Democratic Party of Korea's legal committee

* 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]
Kim Gun-hee's independent counsel bill, which was put on the redraw along with the main contentious bill, was rejected by the National Assembly yesterday. With four votes of departure in the passport, there are also growing calls for an exit strategy. Today, we invited Kim Ki-heung, a former deputy spokesman for the president's office, and Jang Hyun-joo, a former vice chairman of the Democratic Party of Korea's legal committee. Welcome. The rejection was expected, but if you look at it, about four votes have come out of the people's power, can you see it like this?

[Kim Gi-heung]
The aftertaste is not good, and in my view, floor leader Choo Kyung-ho does not seem to put much meaning on the four votes, but in my view, it should be meaningful. This doesn't mean it'll pass the next time we vote. In my view, it shows that there are disagreements within the party on various situations, and I don't think that this part has been systematically moved from supporting representative Han Dong-hoon. Opinions came out naturally within the party, but isn't it a little different from the part where it passes, which means that there is a problem with the passage of Kim Gun-hee's special prosecutor? In a way, the most necessary thing in the middle stage is Kim Gun-hee's apology in a way, and I think there are some voices within the party that it is necessary for that part. So I need an apology from Mrs. Kim Gun-hee. I think it's a result of the vote that reflects that kind of voice.

[Anchor]
You don't know who it is at all. I can't find out who it is, but someone who wants to convey that atmosphere took it, so I can see it like this, what kind of opinion can it be considered as reflecting?

[Jang Hyun-joo]
I agree with the spokesperson. In fact, since this is an anonymous vote, it will be difficult to know exactly which member voted to vote down or vote. However, if we reasonably infer, the number of seats of the people's power is 108, but the 104 opposition is that at least four votes have left. Of those four votes, two were actively in favor of it, and two votes were invalid or abstained and passively opposed the party's theory. In fact, I expect this to be the last rejection. Now, it can only be said that it is really close to the bottom, and if eight votes leave, the president's veto will actually be neutralized, and four of them have already left, as the spokesman said, it is clear that there have been warnings within the ruling camp, and I think there is a message that if it continues to be repeated like this, I cannot guarantee that it will be rejected next time. Therefore, if the position of the President's Office does not change in fact, I think this is actually the last rejection.

[Anchor]
But if it gets 8 votes, it's going to be passed. So I have no choice but to guess now, but would it be individual play, or would it have been more systematically divided into roles? How can you guess?

[Jang Hyun-joo]
I don't think there is any basis yet to say that the roles have been systematically divided within the passport. Rather, personally, even if the party's theory is set, I think each and every member of the people's power is a constitutional institution, and it was a vote based on conscience that considered various public sentiment. That's why this would have been the last rejection, and if the President's Office doesn't respond to these warning messages, I don't think we can guarantee the result next time.

[Anchor]
Representative Han Dong-hoon hesitated when asked what he would do if the Democratic Party proposed again, saying that the rejection was correct.

[Kim Gi-heung]
So if you look at the schedule, no matter how fast the Democratic Party does, I think it will be around the end of October or November, but I think I talked in the hope that there will be a certain part in between. Whether you approve it, invalid it, or abstain, I don't think that the vote should be passed by the current Democratic Party of Korea's Special Prosecutor Kim Gun-hee Act. So in the end, as I said earlier, some changes are needed and the most central part of the changes is Kim Gun-hee's apology, but among them, there are many political offensives. However, isn't it inappropriate to receive luxury bags from the public's perspective, regardless of the law? Lady should be honest about this. Because this problem keeps repeating itself. If so, shouldn't the ruling party bring out something productive instead of opposing the opposition's veto? When it comes to that, we have to go over the page, but we have to go over the chapter, but we can't, right?

And in terms of not being able to see the positive effects of the Yoon Suk Yeol government no matter what it does, shouldn't we do this for the Yoon Suk Yeol government or for the success of our government beyond the conflict between representative Han Dong-hoon and the president? I think this part of my voice will get louder and louder.

[Anchor]
But actually, in the general election, the presidential office was in a kind of drawing a line, but do you think there could be a possibility of an apology now given the atmosphere?

[Kim Gi-heung]
For me, in the conservative camp, there are a few interpretations of former President Park Geun Hye's apology at that time. Didn't you even get impeached for apologizing at that time? Of course, there was room for impeachment then, but anyway, when you apologized, is the Democratic offensive like that? You admit it, it's not this. I think there are some political judgments on this part because I can go more aggressively, saying, "I admit it."
But aside from that, I believe in the people in this regard and the people know that there is a lot of political offensive among the various suspicions of Mrs. Kim Gun-hee. So I think it's better to trust and do it once.

[Anchor]
As the backlash continues, the people's power now says an exit strategy is necessary, and one of them is Kim Gun-hee's apology. If we make a sincere apology, can the Democratic Party of Korea also end the scenario of a reoccurrence, or does it matter?

[Jang Hyun-joo]
If Mrs. Kim Geon-hee apologizes, I think that apology is the least we can do for the people. Of course, there was inappropriate behavior as a spouse of the president, so of course, I think it is necessary to sincerely apologize to the people for that. Apology, criminal punishment, and the investigation process seem to be separate. Therefore, the allegations of the special prosecution law against Mrs. Kim, which the Democratic Party is talking about now, are not just suspicions of receiving luxury goods. Since there are cases of manipulation of Deutsche Motors stock prices and recent suspicions of intervention in nominations, I don't think the move to propose the independent counsel law will disappear just because Kim Gun-hee apologizes for the luxury white goods. Nevertheless, since it's a duty to the people, I think you have to apologize, and I think it can be enough to justify the party's argument to reject it when another vote comes next time.

[Anchor]
There will also be problems between the government and the government, and the scandal of Kim Dae-nam's transcript continues to grow inside the people's power. From the presidential office. It is a controversy that former administrator Kim Dae-nam instigated an attack on representative Han Dong-hoon to a left-wing YouTuber. Let's hear what it's about once again.

I've heard the transcript of former administrator Kim Dae-nam and the party's reaction. Kim Dae-nam, former administrator, is not a familiar person to many people, but he is now known from the presidential office. We've heard the recording of Han Dong-hoon's owner of the attack. How should we understand the context of who he is and why he did this?

[Kim Gi-heung]
First of all, I was like this in the presidential office, so I'm upset and angry about the part where this recording came out and this controversy arose.
For the change of government, that is, for one individual named Yoon Seok-yeol, we didn't make that effort during the presidential election, but because of the public's hope for a change of government. Anyway, don't you mean that you talked negatively about the president and the first lady because you didn't receive the nomination, and eventually, at the national convention, you bought Han Dong-hoon, a left-wing YouTuber, to the extreme?

[Anchor]
Plus, you're reporter Lee Myung-soo.

[Kim Gi-heung]
That's right. That's why I'm more angry and I'm a little bit like that, but this is actually someone I've known since the election. This person worked in the construction sector. That's why we use that expression. Don't you say you're friendly? That's why this person worked on the organization side. So, it's hard to deny what he worked hard on during the election and everything he worked in the presidential office because of the controversy that came out now, but I think it's inappropriate. I can't say that this controversy is 100% certain to me, but when I worked in the election and then looked at the various systems of the presidential office, this person did this with the guidance of Mrs. Lee, someone from the presidential office, which is zero. Because of his position, it's not a situation that can happen in the relationship between the president and the first lady. Unfortunately, if you look at the five-hour recording of the president and the first lady, isn't he expressing a lot of negatively?

But how do you do this for the presidential office? And above all, as the anchor said, don't you know what reporter Lee Myung-soo is like to the presidential office and the current government? If you said you played a team play or did it systematically, former administrator Kim Dae-nam would have consulted someone. If so, I told reporter Lee Myung-soo about this. So the person who got the report was you crazy? Isn't this what you're going to do? So, there can't be team play.

[Anchor]
So what do you think it was for?

[Kim Gi-heung]
That's how I am. If you look at it, he says he's a junior in the region. I think that was the case at first. I mean, isn't this person very aggressive toward Mrs. Kim Gun-hee when it comes to doing so with various civic groups and so-called organizations and things like that? But when I got on the phone and talked about it, he said he didn't mean it. That's why we got close. So, I had an opponent, but I was an enemy, but I wanted to make it on our side, so we talked about many things. It's inappropriate, I'm not saying it's good. I said something I couldn't say, and I think I should be criticized, but it's an individual deviation, and as it gets bigger and bigger, isn't this not just our problem, but the current opposition party sees it as a good thing? I think we need to find out the facts.

However, I'll actually tell you the truth that this is going out like this, that there is a back ship behind it, that the president did it, and that this is the case. You made a fortune to the extreme side of left-wing YouTubers. It's unpleasant. But where did you do this report? You did it at Seoul Sound. Then, isn't that your intention? Then, from our point of view, there are many circumstances that can be said to be personal enough to say that it is a team play from now on and that there is a back seat.

[Anchor]
It's an individual deviation. The presidential office also officially expressed its position that it has no relationship with Yoon Suk Yeol and his wife, but it is related to the presidential office's public office discipline because the former administrator came out and did it anyway. Whether it is possible to draw a line just because it is irrelevant is also not easy to argue.

[Jang Hyun-joo]
That's right. If former administrator Kim Dae-nam worked in the presidential office and looked at his activities after that, doesn't it mean that he went to the full-time auditor position of Seoul Guarantee Insurance right after the national convention? In fact, the opposition party is known to have worked in the construction field and has no financial experience, but there are many suspicions about how they were able to go directly to the full-time auditor position of Seoul Guarantee. In particular, there are suspicions that he was greeted as Boeunseong because he instigated an attack on the owner of the attack, CEO Han Dong-hoon, which is still a problem, and these parts were realized. In this parliamentary inspection, even at the level of the steering committee, there are even comments that former administrator Kim Dae-nam should be called as a witness and asked.
Therefore, I think there will be a fact-finding investigation into whether this personnel was legal and who was involved in this personnel.

And of course, it could be an individual deviation, but the inspection was started from the standpoint of representative Han Dong-hoon and the people's power, and lawmakers in close circles are now raising suspicions that this is not just an individual deviation, but that it is behind it.

[Anchor]
This is why he instigated Han Dong-hoon to attack during the sensitive national convention. I'm curious about what the motive is, but as you said, there have been many people who have suffered in camps before going to public companies, but there seem to be many opinions that it's not a position to go to the full-time auditor of Seoul Guarantee Insurance and the process is unclear. I think we need to look into this. What do you think?

[Kim Gi-heung]
First of all, it doesn't meet the public's eye level. Many people see it as inappropriate. But I'm not trying to defend this person. From your point of view, I received that this person is level 3, but in fact, the position of level 3 in the presidential office is not that low. And another thing is that the Yoon Suk Yeol government began in May 2022, and is it until May this year? There has never been a promotion. So, for example, during the Lee Myung Bak government, they were promoted every six months to a year.

[Anchor]
Is there a particular reason?

[Kim Gi-heung]
I think the president had an idea. It's hard to suffer, but from the president's point of view, there's that. Don't we have fish balls and old balls? Fishing is so-called political, so-called, and plays a political role, so it's not like that from a long time ago. Neulgong is a person who took the civil service examination from a long time ago. In my case, it was fishing. So, if you look at your past experience, you could get a promotion once because you were evaluated for that, but in the sense that there was no such process, and this person also served as a job representative.

From that point of view, I don't think it's absurd, but I'm a little puzzled as to whether I have expertise. From that point of view, yes. I'm a little embarrassed to say this about public enterprises, but there are some things that have been done since the political circles changed their governments, and expertise is important, but on the other hand, it's a private company, and it's more than 90% of those shareholders in the forecast, right? If so, I wonder if there was an advantage in networking through this person, and I think it served as a plus factor in moving full-time. Nevertheless, I think it might have been a bit excessive.

[Anchor]
The presidential office is also pressuring you to decide your own course of action, seeing this incident as inappropriate anyway.

[Kim Gi-heung]
As I mentioned earlier, it's not a public company. It's a private company, and some of the government's influence can work. There are many difficulties for the presidential office. So, if you were a public company or rather a ministry, obviously this undermined a lot of dignity and caused a lot of problems, so you could take personnel measures. There are some limitations because it is a private company. They said there was some room for abuse of authority. That's why when you look at various situations in a certain part, I think you should make a decision.

[Anchor]
Anyway, CEO Han Dong-hoon, who was attacked, expressed his unusually quite immediate and direct position. Rep. Na Kyung-won even used the expression, "This is the act," and the mayor of Hong Joon Pyo criticized this much, "This is a bit of a livelihood," so do you think the level of response was appropriate?

[Jang Hyun-joo]
First of all, Na Kyung-won seems to be expressing concern in terms of the fact that the conflict between the party and the government could be further amplified. However, from the outside, in a way, the victim of the owner of the attack may be seen as representative Han Dong-hoon. Nevertheless, CEO Han Dong-hoon is saying that he should inspect this part and investigate the truth because he was attacked, but in a way, he seems to be telling the victim Han Dong-hoon why he is raising his work like that, so from the outside and from the public's perspective, there must be a little wonder.

Rather, if the party is suspected of colluding with the so-called left-wing YouTuber to attack the candidate for the national convention at the time, I think it is more common sense for them to come forward and unite to get to the bottom of it. And it would be more reasonable for me to find out the truth and say that if there is a man behind it, we should get all out of the way, but even within the power of the people, lawmakers Na Kyung-won and Hong Joon Pyo governor are now criticizing it, saying, "Rep. Han Dong-hoon is growing the work," so I think this is appropriate from the outside. Nevertheless, I don't think CEO Han Dong-hoon will stop here. Of course, the inspection will continue, and if there is a criminal charge after the inspection, it is expected that the criminal charges will proceed.

[Anchor]
Anyway, find the mastermind. Some people say that they went too far with these instructions. What do you think about it personally?

[Kim Gi-heung]
First of all, although it has appeared in the media, there is one thing I want to tell you. Before I talked to so-called former administrator Kim Dae-nam and reporter Lee Myung-soo, there was a little talk about this. So what it is is is that Lee Sang-kyu, chairman of the party's cooperation committee, who ran as the best young man, took issue with this related story through so-called YouTube. It was July 2nd. Next, reporter Lee Myung-soo and former administrator Kim Dae-nam passed it on July 10. There is a one-week period. That's why this is the so-called Yeouido Research Institute, doesn't it? This must have been the story of this part, at first. However, I went to former administrator Kim Dae-nam through someone, and aside from going there personally, what is already known is that in terms of July 2nd, he seems to have seen it somewhere, as former administrator Kim Dae-nam said, rather than saying, "Someone should buy it specifically." When I say that, I'll tell you the aspect that this is not absurd.

[Anchor]
That's because it can't be concluded.

[Kim Gi-heung]
I'm telling you that there's a possibility like that. Isn't my current situation a situation where I have an opponent? Then if I were Han Dong-hoon, it would be very difficult. Personally, I think this will be very unpleasant and angry, and I'm doing a fact-finding investigation, but aren't other people around you helping each other out? Then, the gap between the presidential office and representative Han Dong-hoon will inevitably widen. It's very difficult in this respect. It's hard to make a home, but I wonder what it would have been like. If CEO Han Dong-hoon became like this, I know that there are people who criticize me and support me during the convention process. These absurd accusers have also come in. Attacks, reports, etc. were also reported. But I believe.

Then, if we had just moved on from a big frame and embraced it, I think why are the people and supporters of Han Dong-hoon or President Yoon Suk Yeol doing that to each other? There's a part like that. So when there is a crisis, I think it would have been more of a plus if representative Han Dong-hoon did this in such a situation when I made concessions in a big frame. If that happens, I'll be very angry, too.

[Anchor]
Anyway, CEO Han Dong-hoon also said that CEO Han Dong-hoon is holding it in a lot. I think it's a matter for CEO Han Dong-hoon to judge how much the limit to endure is. Anyway, if we move on to the Democratic Party now, it seems that the Democratic Party is also noisy internally because of the transcript problem. This is a transcript of the conversation former lieutenant governor Lee Hwa-young had with his lawyer. Let's hear what they're talking about first.

As you can see. What Lee Hwa-young, the former lieutenant governor, shared during his interview with his lawyer at the detention center was revealed at the impeachment hearing of prosecutor Park Sang-yong. Representative Joo Jin-woo made the disclosure, and I don't know exactly how I obtained the transcript, but is it correct that the lawyer of former lieutenant governor Lee Hwa-young presented the transcript to the court?

[Jang Hyun-joo]
That's how it's known. So, it is known that this was a conversation that was made during the interview with former Deputy Governor Lee Hwa-young, during the interview with a lawyer, but this was recorded and recently submitted to the court. Therefore, from the Democratic Party's point of view, even though the transcript was submitted to the court and accessible to only a few people, lawmaker Joo Jin-woo obtained the transcript and played some of it at the hearing, so he is now suspicious of how he got it.

[Anchor]
But I heard that the contents of the transcript were reported in Oh My News before?

[Jang Hyun-joo]
It was reported by a media company, and according to lawmaker Joo Jin-woo, he was a former prosecutor, and lawmaker Park Eun-jung also has this transcript. That's why he claims that there is no problem with how he obtained it. However, from the perspective of the Democratic Party of Korea, they said they would go over the details of how they obtained the transcript, and since they played only a part of the transcript, there is a problem with the recording being misinterpreted as if there were huge suspicions surrounding Chairman Lee Jae-myung and Chairman Kim Sung-tae. The Democratic Party of Korea's position is that it is not actually against Chairman Lee Jae-myung or such.

[Anchor]
We can't understand this situation because it's a short recording and we didn't hear the entire recording.The words "ma" are not simple. There are talks about lobbying the court, paying for lawyers, and there seem to be talks about political funds.

[Kim Gi-heung]
So, in my view, what comes to mind from here is the square, followed by Lee Hae-chan and Cho Jung-sik, and in fact, if you look at former Prime Minister Lee Hae-chan at Seoul National University's Nokdu Street, there is a square bookstore. There's a word that I really like when it comes to this square. From the perspective of former CEO Lee Hae-chan. However, the organization called Gwangjang was a support group for former Prime Minister Lee Hae-chan, but it was changed to Lee Jae-myung's group during the presidential election process. However, in this regard, Chairman Kim Sung-tae sponsored something to the square, and didn't he support split it? After all, didn't you help Governor Lee Jae-myung's support group? Then, some people said, "Isn't this a violation of the Political Fund Act?" In fact, what's being said now is not a very new story. But it was under the water, but it came back up. Then, I don't understand why the lawyer took the voice of the client and presented it to the court. And as far as I know, he gave it to a second trial lawyer. Then, as far as I know, the lawyer can't record it, so why is that? So I think from two perspectives, if you look at this part in a way, in the power of the people, it will be an investigation by filing a complaint, and the other side is... [Anchor] are you planning to file a complaint?

[Kim Gi-heung]
I think that's what I think. I think it's a natural step because there are suspicions about this part and the investigation agency has to investigate it. Another thing is, in a way, for CEO Lee Jae-myung's BTS, didn't I make the defendant Lee Hwa-young's solo stage? But didn't it become like adding another lump while trying to take off the lump? That's why I think I was pushed back while trying to use too much power.

[Anchor]
In fact, prosecutor Park Sang-yong's impeachment hearing did not come out directly because he was in overseas training, but the atmosphere of controversy seems to be focused on former lieutenant governor Lee Hwa-young, not on prosecutor Park Sang-yong. The media paid a lot of attention to the expression "I'm very afraid" in the transcript, but it seems to be a presumption, but can you read the atmosphere of being quite sensitive to statements related to Vice Chairman Kim Sung-tae?

[Jang Hyun-joo]
It seems clear that you will have to listen to the entire recording and weigh the context. However, it is not clear in what context the fear came from, but at least to hear the whole purpose, it seems that the lawyers are trying to emphasize that former Lieutenant Governor Lee Hwa-young was feeling quite pressure or various fears. So, the lawyer's side continues to claim that former Lieutenant Governor Lee Hwa-young has been being conciliated and pressured about the statement, so it is speculated that it is a recording that can support it. Various funding from the square was provided. In this case, the recording was actually made in July last year, and if there were any serious allegations here or any clues to the investigation, you might expect that the prosecution would have already obtained it and investigated it. Therefore, there seems to be no possibility that the recording itself will increase any charges against Lee Jae-myung or former lieutenant governor Lee Hwa-young.

[Anchor]
In any case, former Deputy Governor Lee Hwa-young also claimed that it was too organized, but it was submitted to the court, so the judiciary is likely to judge the contents of the transcript. I'll wrap it up here. They were Kim Ki-heung, a former deputy spokesperson for the president's office, and Jang Hyun-joo, a former vice chairman of the Democratic Party of Korea's legal committee. Thank you.