[New Square 10] The Senior Civil Servant Corruption Investigations Unit's withdrawal of the arrest warrant...Where's the investigation going?

■ Host: Anchor Park Seok-won, Anchor Um Ji-min
■ Starring: Kim Hyung-joon, Chair Professor of Baejae University, Presidential Leadership Research Institute, Choi Jin

* The text below may differ from the actual broadcast content, so please check the broadcast for more accurate information. Please specify [YTN New Square 10AM] when quoting.

2025-01-07 09:59:49

[Anchor]
Confusion over the unprecedented arrest of a sitting president continues as the Senior Civil Servant Corruption Investigations Unit said it would entrust the police with the execution of arrest warrants. Let's take a look at the situation with the two of you. Kim Hyung-joon, chair professor at Baejae University, and Choi Jin, president of the Presidential Leadership Institute, will be with you. Welcome.

After a while, I think it's just starting to open. The special investigation committee and the special investigation committee will be held over allegations of civil war, and the schedule for the operation will be adjusted today. But hasn't the war of nerves continued over the adoption of witnesses?

[Choi Jin]
Perhaps depending on who the witness is, the wavelength will increase considerably, so it is predicted that there will be a fierce battle between the ruling and opposition parties over this part. In particular, the Democratic Party of Korea is planning to publicize the exact nature of the impeachment, martial law, and the political situation, which are quite controversial due to legal controversy, to the public through the National Assembly Special Committee. They are even preparing for so-called prison hearings, where they go directly to the prison and hold hearings with witnesses. Therefore, the battle between the ruling and opposition parties is likely to be fiercer than ever because the Democratic Party, which has recently been on the defensive due to the withdrawal of rebellion, is determined to turn the situation around again through the National Assembly Special Committee.

[Anchor]
In the ruling party, Chairman Lee Jae-myung should be present as a witness. He insists, and the opposition must have Yoon Suk Yeol's president present. What questions do you think should be asked to come up with a practical story from the National Assembly Special Committee? [Kim Hyung-joon] In fact, President Yoon Suk Yeol is a party to emergency martial law, so I think Lee Jae-myung talked about martial law after meeting with Lee Seok-yeon, the former head of the Legislative Office. So, there's a saying that they'll listen to the testimony on that part. Also, in the case of lawmaker Kim Min-seok, he talked about martial law all the time, so there are probably parts that he wants to find out through the special investigation committee on how he got such information. However, in the past, in order for the special investigation committee to proceed properly, it is necessary to adopt witnesses that the ruling and opposition parties agree on.

If each person adopts a witness only to the side they want, I think there is a high possibility that it will go to a debate. Furthermore, aren't there a lot of people arrested for emergency martial law? So, as the investigation continues now, a parliamentary investigation or a special prosecutor is usually chosen when the prosecution or investigation is not progressing, but there are parts that are happening very simultaneously, so I think we have to see how to tie this up.

[Anchor]
A special investigation committee will be held in a little while, and let's connect the field and listen to what the ruling and opposition parties will say at the special investigation committee. Let's move on to the next question. Yesterday, the confusion over the execution of arrest warrants between the Senior Civil Servant Corruption Investigations Unit and the police was very controversial. How did you see this?

[Choi Jin]
In the first place, the cooperation between the Senior Civil Servant Corruption Investigations Unit and the police was actually a close cooperation system. Because neither the Senior Civil Servant Corruption Investigations Unit nor the police is in a completely horizontal relationship, isn't the arrest warrant executed in a state of limbo? In addition, when the Senior Civil Servant Corruption Investigations Unit continued to have controversy over the right to investigate and was in trouble, the authority to execute the arrest warrant was handed over to the police, but the police refused it again. As the Senior Civil Servant Corruption Investigations Unit was in a state of great confusion again, the Senior Civil Servant Corruption Investigations Unit became a public enemy and neighborhood book. However, I think it is likely that a similar situation would have unfolded in the first place if the Senior Civil Servant Corruption Investigations Unit did not start enforcement in the first place, but if the police or prosecution did. Because President Yoon Suk Yeol said he would do it proudly and proudly, whether it was impeachment or investigation, but he wouldn't avoid it, but he's still avoiding it, right? What's more, is it today? In the first place, there was no choice but to make a strong legal resistance in any form because they protested the collective notification of the hearing date, avoided various legal aspects, and avoided serving trial documents. In the meantime, the organizational system and various inadequate airlift offices were in a very difficult position. [Anchor] At a time when the Senior Civil Servant Corruption Investigations Unit failed to secure recruits for President Yoon Suk Yeol, and various problems arose from these procedural problems, leading to criticism that the Senior Civil Servant Corruption Investigations Unit admitted its lack of competence. The Senior Civil Servant Corruption Investigations Unit drew a line on pointing out capabilities, and there is a limit to a workforce of about 50 people. He acknowledged that.

[KIM HYEONGJUN]
Of course. Because the Senior Civil Servant Corruption Investigations Unit actually came to the National Assembly to talk about the investigation of the Marine Corps Chae's special investigation last time. He said that there was no choice but to be slow because there were few investigative prosecutors, but I think there will be a limit to the investigation with existing capabilities in the areas related to serious civil war. However, the core of all this controversy was that regardless of whether the Senior Civil Servant Corruption Investigations Unit had the authority to investigate the crime of rebellion or not.
So if you look at it now, the Senior Civil Servant Corruption Investigations Unit didn't even interpret the criminal law properly. We talked a lot about adjusting the investigation rights between the prosecution and the police. The adjustment of the investigative power of the prosecution and police is the adjustment of the investigative power of the prosecution and police that made it impossible for the prosecutor to direct the police. Then, there are no regulations that can command the police in the Airborne Division Act they have now.

But aren't the police angry because they ignored this and said they would only investigate and hand over the execution to the police? For example, not only does it not fit the legal system, but if it is done, the police will be forced to become a subcontractor of the Senior Civil Servant Corruption Investigations Unit, right? Did you do it knowing that this situation would come out, or did you lack understanding of those parts? So, just like the anchor pointed out, I'm constantly being pointed out about whether the Senior Civil Servant Corruption Investigations Unit is really capable. Yesterday's case seems to have been attacked by both the ruling and opposition parties. Park Chan-dae, the floor leader of the party, strongly warned the head of the Senior Civil Servant Corruption Investigations Unit, saying that the Senior Civil Servant Corruption Investigations Unit should not be a subcontractor of the Democratic Party. There are parts that are not properly executed on this part, and that is because, for example, legal authority is the biggest cause, and furthermore, there is a very lack of manpower, so the answer is out. For example, there is only one institution in Korea that can investigate the crime of rebellion. This is the police. You just have to transfer all of this back to the
police. So the police can lead the way to request a warrant and do everything, but why do you transfer it to the Senior Civil Servant Corruption Investigations Unit and the poor Senior Civil Servant Corruption Investigations Unit tries to lead this, so I think it is necessary to clarify legal clarity on this part.

[Choi Jin]
It is necessary to examine the original problem of why the Senior Civil Servant Corruption Investigations Unit is having a hard time, but in the early days of martial law, the police and the prosecution argued and competed with each other for the right to investigate, and were eventually transferred because the Senior Civil Servant Corruption Investigations Unit asked them to transfer. Until then, neither the police nor the prosecution raised any major problems.

However, there was a problem while executing the work, and this is the sin of the Senior Civil Servant Corruption Investigations Unit. As you can see, the Senior Civil Servant Corruption Investigations Unit was created during the Moon Jae In government when the authority of the prosecution was completely deprived of the prosecution's investigation rights. The strange thing about the Senior Civil Servant Corruption Investigations Unit is that it has the right to investigate but not to prosecute. Insurrection crimes cannot be investigated, but crimes related to the duties of the president, ministers, lawmakers, and high-ranking government officials related to the rebellion can be investigated. In addition, you can't request seizure and search, but you can request an arrest warrant. The role is very ambiguous like this. So if the Senior Civil Servant Corruption Investigations Unit said it could not investigate the president's rebellion at all in the first place, it wouldn't have done a transfer at all. But the regulation is ambiguous. That's why I got it easily, but the problem is that there were many limitations as I tried to execute an arrest warrant. For example, Director Oh Dong-woon probably didn't know that the security service would be so stubbornly resistant, double or triple.

As the professor pointed out earlier, the physical capabilities of the Senior Civil Servant Corruption Investigations Unit are limited. The total number of prosecutors is 25 now, but there are only 14 now. And the total number of people is 50, including investigators. And there are about 30 people now. including prosecutors and investigators Arrest the president with the support of the police with this number of people? It was too much in the first place.

[Anchor]
It's the same with the physical limitations. The Senior Civil Servant Corruption Investigations Unit said that they didn't expect such a backlash from the security service over the failure to execute the arrest warrant on the 3rd. Didn't many people expect a backlash from the security service in this part?

[KIM HYEONGJUN]
Of course. So even though the Senior Civil Servant Corruption Investigations Unit is on the screen now, the Democratic Party of Korea is incompetent now, and there is even a specific party's X-Men. However, there is a little difference between the arrest warrant and the search warrant. In the case of search warrants, Article 110 under our criminal law has been heard a lot, hasn't it? A search warrant is difficult to execute if the president refuses because he said he needs the approval of the head of the agency, especially when it requires confidential information. In order to prevent such things to some extent, the Seoul Western District Judge made an exception to the application of Articles 110 and 111.

For example, there are some conflicts with how a judge can make an exception to the legal thing. There is another legal debate as to whether the arrest warrant has the authority to physically prevent the arrest warrant because the security service is related to the president's safety. Of course, it can be prevented regarding the search warrant. It's a limitation of the Senior Civil Servant Corruption Investigations Unit in a way that I didn't know that it would be prevented so strongly without a detailed review of these parts or what to do to implement them. Another point to point out is, isn't this a collaborative version? We're investigating, and then the person who requested the warrant is the Senior Civil Servant Corruption Investigations Unit. The main agent is the Senior Civil Servant Corruption Investigations Unit. But didn't you just cooperate with the police for support, I asked for it. The Senior Civil Servant Corruption Investigations Unit doesn't have the command over the police. By the way, can I use the police task force to arrest the warrant? That's how the problem can be raised again. The reason for all these things is that the two powers and capabilities move together, and I'm really sorry for the Senior Civil Servant Corruption Investigations Unit, but I don't have the authority, and I'm related to the rebellion investigation. have no competence However, such an airborne organization will continue to hold this. Aren't you being greedy? The solution is simple when we have a situation quickly. We're going back to the basics. It's a return to principle.
So if the police quickly re-transferred the investigation related to the crime of rebellion and do it there, isn't President Yoon Suk Yeol's lawyer doing the same now? They say they will confidently go out and explain if they request an arrest warrant, so I think special measures are needed because the Senior Civil Servant Corruption Investigations Unit has lost a lot of trust.

[Choi Jin]
Of course, I agree with that part, but what I want to object to from a different angle is two things considering that President Yoon Suk Yeol has been legally resistant since the recent martial law incident. One is that even if a legal and legitimate warrant was executed like the police, not the Senior Civil Servant Corruption Investigations Unit, President Yoon Suk Yeol is likely to have strongly refused. And the other thing is that if the security service stubbornly uses all its might to reject the arrest warrant, it is difficult for any organization, not the police, to succeed in execution. In the first place, however, the Senior Civil Servant Corruption Investigations Unit was completely carpetbombed like a local drum because there was a controversy over the right to investigate and there was a physical limit to the investigation.

Why? On what ground? The various things that the President of Yoon Suk Yeol has done so far. It would be so if you see the refusal to serve the trial, the delay in the formation of lawyers, and the refusal of the Constitutional Court to serve the trial mentioned today. In the future, even if the Senior Civil Servant Corruption Investigations Unit goes over and the police or prosecution enters the Constitutional Court, President Yoon Suk Yeol will probably continue to take similar steps to a full-scale legal rejection struggle, the same attitude as now. I'm sure of that.

[Anchor]
But didn't you re-claim it? The police are also talking about the possibility of using a special police force if the security agency blocks it like last time, so how is the security agency or the president's office responding to the re-execution this time?

[Choi Jin]
I think I'm going to stubbornly reject it, though. Wouldn't it be re-enforcement and much more police force? I'm considering a mobile strike group, but even so, I'll reject it for now. However, I wonder what kind of compromise will be made with each other just before the incident occurs due to physical conflict. Because if something like that happens, it hurts both sides a lot, and it's not desirable from the president's point of view.

[KIM HYEONGJUN]
The key was that it gave me a justification to reject it now because it was done by an unauthorized agency. What happens if the police have the power to investigate insurrection crimes, for example, and the authority refuses an arrest warrant, whether it's a warrant or an arrest warrant? Now I expect it to be a physical conflict, but this is very unfavorable in the Constitution. There were three reasons for impeachment in the 2017 impeachment of President Park Geun Hye. One is that there was a real abuse of authority, and the second is that there is no will to protect the constitution. Because even though I've asked you to attend many times, you still violate the law. protective of the Constitution Finally, the third is that he was fired because he was judged to be nationally advantageous rather than continuing to remain president.

If you continue to break the law and resist in this way, you have no choice but to slowly think about how this will affect the Constitution. Because the Constitutional Court has a deadline, doesn't it? In that sense, why do you keep mobilizing mobile strike groups instead of following the principle, and the president is wrong to mobilize the military while declaring an emergency martial law? You say you did something wrong. Emergency martial law is the president's authority. Even though the Senior Civil Servant Corruption Investigations Unit doesn't have the authority, you're going to use the police's task force? Since there are quite a few controversial parts, I'm telling you that if we analyze the situation to this extent, we can no longer solve this problem with the Senior Civil Servant Corruption Investigations Unit, so I think we need to go back to the basics.

[Choi Jin]
I totally agree with that. If a president who is a legal professional who agrees but knows the law very well mobilizes all legal professionals, so if a president who knows well mobilizes all legal professionals to take issue with and point out subsequent law enforcement, nothing progresses properly. For example, in the Constitutional Court trial, the case of litigation data was also illegal, so did you refuse to serve it yourself? The president didn't abide by the most basic investigation, did he? And the president said he wouldn't avoid the Constitution or the investigation at all, but isn't he continuing to avoid it? Even so, I think similar situations will come in the future. Also, since the president is a legal professional who has been a prosecutor for 27 years, he knows better than anyone else about loopholes and blind spots in the law. Aren't there various signs that you're making full use of those parts? So I guarantee you, this is with all due respect.Ma, even if the prosecution or police investigate legally again, the parts that are resistant, anti-problematic, and problematic will continue to be repeated.

Especially in the Constitutional Court, the date of pleading has been set, but in many ways, the methodology, witness attendance, and various issues will be raised and raised by the president of Yoon Suk Yeol. I'm not sure I'll do it. I'm going to catch the pods of the law, I'm sure. So, I think the current situation will continue to be repeated until the end of the Constitutional Court for the time being.

[Anchor]
Prosecutor Lee Jae-seung of the Senior Civil Servant Corruption Investigations Unit said that the Senior Civil Servant Corruption Investigations Unit will consider relocating to the police or the prosecution at some stage, rather than proceeding arbitrarily in the future, but from now on, the Senior Civil Servant Corruption Investigations Unit and the police are working together to continue the investigation. First of all, the professor insisted on a transfer, but what are the important things for the collaborative copy to investigate smoothly?

[KIM HYEONGJUN]
For example, over a certain period of time, the Dong-A Ilbo investigated, and did the results come out? For example, the structure is the same now, but does it change suddenly over time? We need to change the structure. Another thing is, the solution in what I've just said is that the incumbent president is now a Yoon Suk Yeol. My job was suspended. What did CEO Lee Jae-myung say on December 15th last year? It's related to you, related to the election law. I talked about the presumption of innocence. So, the principle of presumption of innocence is that even if the right to run for election is deprived at the appeal trial in the election law, there is a principle of presumption of innocence if the early presidential election is held, so I can go out. Then the same logic should be applied. So Kwon Young-se, chairman of the emergency response committee, is conducting a voluntary investigation. That's the part that keeps saying that it's right to conduct a random investigation based on the principle of presumption of innocence.

Last time, in the case of Chairman Lee Jae-myung, some charges are cleared when dismissing the warrant, but he dismissed the warrant because he is engaged in political activities as an incumbent opposition leader. Now, former representative Cho Kuk is in prison, but he has not been arrested in court even after the second trial. Why? To give him the right to defend himself. No, he said, "What defense rights do you need to go to the Supreme Court?" but he didn't arrest him in court in order to play his role as a politician. because of the right to defend The principle of presumption of innocence, the right to defend, all of these things apply only to a specific person. It means that they should be applied in the same way. That's the principle of the law. The law is equal before everyone. It shouldn't go selectively. In that sense, isn't there two ways to solve this problem? As I said now, if the police are investigating by transferring according to the principle, and the impeachment trial is underway now, can the right to defend against arrest or detention be guaranteed?

We'll think about those things in depth. This is not for any particular person, but please obey the basic principles of the law. I'm talking about it in this, but if I say it like this, do you mean that President Yoon Suk Yeol did a good job? Who does the President of Yoon Suk Yeol say did a good job? More than 80% of the people say that emergency martial law is wrong. However, when entering the realm of law, it is a mature society in its own way only through the procedures and principles set by the law, as well as past cases and norms. That's how I see it.

[Choi Jin]
The presumption of innocence is correct. That's right, but I think it's quite problematic when it's abused. For example, an armed terrorist armed with a gun and a knife was arrested at the scene after going on quite a rampage on Baekju Boulevard. But as it turns out, the armed terrorist is a man who knows the law very well. So what happens if you respond legally to every single case and make a pod as a legal matter?

According to the presumption of innocence, should all human rights be guaranteed for the terrorist who was immediately arrested at the scene of the armed terrorist? I think this is a bit different. And the other thing is that the martial law you mentioned earlier is clearly problematic, didn't we admit it? But it's a logic like, "Did law enforcement work properly?" Most of the rest, except for our professor, say that martial law has become a problem, and the logic of impeachment, attack, and counterattack have talked so much that does the public and listeners perceive that there is a real problem with martial law? There are a lot of logic that seem to be so illusionary that it seems to be defending too much to be mistaken.
For example, 40 members of the People's Power Party are going out, or in recent years, they seem to actively advocate martial law, which makes them feel like they are doing so.

[Anchor]
We've expanded the scope of the Senior Civil Servant Corruption Investigations Unit's authority, due process, and even the theoretical story. Let's talk a little more about the Senior Civil Servant Corruption Investigations Unit. Director of Public Offenses Oh Dong-woon will appear at the Judiciary Committee this afternoon. From there, Director of Public Offices Oh Dong-woon will talk about the possibility of a transfer or any legal procedure, so what do you think the Public Offices should talk about?

[Choi Jin]
First of all, the Senior Civil Servant Corruption Investigations Unit will be subjected to a flurry of attacks before saying anything, and the ruling and opposition parties will aggressively attack. They are incompetent. Wouldn't you be under pressure to resign from various attacks that you didn't have the will to execute? So, at this point, even if the arrest warrant is reissued, the power of the Senior Civil Servant Corruption Investigations Unit has declined a lot. I think I exposed a lot of limitations. However, it is unreasonable to say that everything that has been done so far has been luxury and that there is a problem. In the course of this National Assembly discussion, it is necessary to reorganize the investigation line against President Yoon Suk Yeol. Isn't there an airborne organization, police, and prosecutors, as it is now? Isn't there a copy of it? Don't you have a special version? And there's a special team right now. There's also a noodle book. The public will be quite confused because this will be mixed up and aired. One of them is the Senior Civil Servant Corruption Investigations Unit, and anyway, the importance of the special prosecutor is once again strongly raised in such a confusing situation. The division of roles in the cooperation between the Senior Civil Servant Corruption Investigations Unit and the police, I hope this will be clearly done in this process by the National Assembly. That's my wish.

[KIM HYEONGJUN]
If the Democratic Party really solved this problem and recognized the limitations of the public prosecution, the solution is simple. If the independent counsel law is decided through a third-party method, I think the ruling party is likely to accept it. So Kwon Young-se, chairman of the emergency committee, said that. If the ruling and opposition parties reach an agreement, wouldn't that be the only way to recommend the independent counsel? But if the special prosecutor makes an agreement rather than the opposition party making concessions in that way, isn't all related investigations now supposed to go to the special prosecutor? There is no longer any part that the Senior Civil Servant Corruption Investigations Unit can be involved in. It's hard to understand why you don't implement it even though you have a solution.

If you can be questioned about what you really want, whether you are trying to find out the truth or for what political and policy purposes you are doing this, what is the point of talking about it in the Judiciary Committee? After it's over, Director of Public Offices Oh Dong-woon says, "We'll go according to the set procedures," so would he impeach the Director of Public Offices again now? There's a way, but why don't you find the way and keep going somewhere else? This is the limit of Korean politics. This is the bare face of Korean politics. There's definitely a way, isn't there? Politics is the most important function of the ruling and opposition parties to mediate conflict through agreement, but isn't Korean politics amplifying conflict rather than coordinating it?
So now that you're being told that politics is falling and politics is regressing, you can sort this out more calmly. Since it's the new year now. With this problem, I can't tell if it's 2024 or 2025. I can't believe it's a new year at all. I want you to find a political solution.

[Choi Jin]
I completely agree with Professor Kim Hyung-joon. In the current impeachment and martial law, the Democratic Party seems to be in a position of power leading the political situation. Therefore, Democrats should never overuse accusations, impeachment, or anything like this. Now that the Democratic Party is in a superior situation, the Democratic Party should take a step back and make concessions. And there is no end to the legal debate, so as Professor Kim Hyung-joon pointed out earlier, the ruling and opposition parties have to agree. If the two sides are in a tight race, it is the Democratic Party that will take a step back and make concessions, not the power of the ruling party, the people. Rather, the Democratic Party of Korea takes a step back, takes two steps back, makes a compromise, negotiates, and believes that if the special prosecution or whatever happens, the current confusion can be much reduced.

[Anchor]
Director Choi, the Democratic Party of Korea said that we should not over-exert accusations or impeachment, but now the Democratic Party of Korea has decided to file a complaint with the acting chief Choi Sang-mok to the Senior Civil Servant Corruption Investigations Unit. On the 3rd, he criticized the presidential security office for not doing anything about it, saying, "This is the second act of rebellion."

[KIM HYEONGJUN]
Acting Han Deok-soo also started as a complaint in the early days. I did it in connection with the conspiracy charges. After that, they went to impeachment when their demands were not followed. So maybe it's a kind of cautionary note in the first place. After filing a complaint, they say, "Why don't you help me in executing it now, for example, when you do something like this, you say you will impeach, but it's your authority." The power of the opposition, there may be. So why don't you recognize the power of acting president? Then, even if you are an acting authority in all areas, isn't it Choi Sang-mok who is moving the Republic of Korea right now? Then, isn't it a kind of intimidation to immediately impeach or accuse the acting president with what he judged and did? I'm putting pressure on you. That's what I'm saying now, it's become a laughing stock overseas. Even if you have the power to impeach, you shouldn't overdo it. If we start impeaching again this time, it will be our 30th impeachment. Then there are basic requirements for impeachment. Isn't it unconstitutional and illegal because you didn't comply with the requirements when you could declare emergency martial law? Just as it is controversial that mobilizing the military is also a crime of rebellion. Then, if you want to impeach, you have to meet the reasons for impeachment.

For example, can it be the reason for the impeachment that Han Deok-soo, the acting president, demanded a re-voting right when impeaching him? It's impeachment when there's a very serious constitutional, legal violation, what's the point of abuse without it? It's nothing else. So, in that sense, the opposition party should refrain from it and try to solve this problem, and because they want to do everything with strength, there was also an emergency martial law. With power... the emergency martial law is wrong, so the opposition party's runaway in the National Assembly cannot be justified. In that sense, the opposition party is now. So look at the trend of public opinion now. We don't talk about direct figures, but the big flow is weird, why is this happening? Why is the support of the people so high and the support of the opposition party so low? Yesterday's Realmeter survey found that the opposition's approval rating has been falling for three consecutive weeks. The Democratic Party of Korea is also really awakened to this. People are saying that people's livelihoods are difficult, but politicians are now on the Galapagos Island, so it feels like they are playing alone. I say that we should no longer go like this.

[Anchor]
Wait a minute. We're making major remarks about the special committee on national affairs at the National Assembly, so we'll connect the site for a while, listen to it, and share our opinions again. It seems that there are stories related to the adoption of witnesses at the site of the special investigation committee. I think the Democratic Party of Korea said that F4 and economic chiefs should be called. In addition, the people's power seems to have expressed a position that should be covered in that regard because there are reasons such as personal information protection. How did you hear this story?

[Choi Jin]
First of all, there seems to be no negotiation between the two sides. Don't you think negotiating is give and take? You give it to me. You get it. Then push and pull, push and pull, and there's no push and pull, and they argue themselves. I will do this. You're going to do this. Such aggressive parts are continuing to take place in the parliamentary investigation and at the investigation site. Even if a special prosecutor takes place in the future, it will be like that. I'd like to say that I'm so frustrated about that. And one more advice to the Democratic Party is that the most scary thing is that when a powerful strong person is in a hurry, it can be quite unreasonable. It's a very dangerous situation. So even though the Democratic Party has a huge seat, it shows that it is obsessed with the judicial risk of the representative and these early presidential elections in many ways. Then, there could be an irrational number. So Democrats need to control the tempo considerably. The author, who wrote the rule of law of power, said that it was the curse of the winner.

So power has a rhythm and a tempo. Those who have power should know how to adjust and control their power appropriately, and if you push with power unconditionally, you can be caught up in a huge headwind, and those in power make a mistake by leaning into their emotions. So, I would like to tell the Democratic Party that it is beneficial to the Democratic Party of Korea and to respond cool-headedly to the idea that the Democratic Party will be in power soon if it wins an early presidential election.

[Anchor]
By the way, since F4 is the head of the economy, are you arguing that we should also call acting chief Choi Sang-mok?

[KIM HYEONGJUN]
Right. For example, the biggest one is the deputy prime minister for economy. Also, it is the role of the deputy prime minister for economy to oversee the overall economy. But if that happens, shouldn't we also think about the case of external credibility because he is not just a deputy prime minister for economy, but acting as an acting president? For example, all the photos that acting acting chief Choi Sang-mok does at the hearing or the investigation committee go to the investigation committee are all like this in real time overseas. But the biggest problem right now is that the opposition party will reveal the truth through a parliamentary investigation. These are all good, but the reaction from overseas right now is who should the government of the Republic of Korea talk to? And who is responsible for what situations. I keep raising questions about these two parts.

The biggest problem is that institutions and companies that tried to invest in Korea naturally shrink, and when uncertainty is removed, the Bank of Korea is already lowering its economic growth rate to 1.8% this year. Isn't the economy in general difficult, domestic demand is sluggish, and exports are now on red light. When you say this, you call the heads of economy and treat them as if they were criminals, and the biggest bad feature of the Korean parliamentary investigation is that they treat them as sinners. Or there's a part where you blasphemy your personality to tell the truth. You have to avoid things like this. So, the important thing about what to uncover is that the ruling and opposition parties must agree on something desperately. Furthermore, in order for democracy to mature properly, it must systematically refrain and respect each other, as Professor Leverky said. It's tolerance. No matter how powerful you have, institutional restraint requires the ruling and opposition parties to negotiate with each other to show mutual tolerance and respect for democracy. I think the same is true of parliamentary democracy. I believe that the parliamentary investigation can only be conducted like a parliamentary investigation if these two norms are followed by the special committee on parliamentary investigation.

[Anchor]
As you said, the people are waiting for the ruling and opposition parties to reach some agreement, but we will deliver additional comments at the special committee meeting. Controversy continues over the removal of charges of rebellion from the reasons for the impeachment of President Yoon Suk Yeol at the National Assembly. First of all, what do you think of the two of you on this issue?

[Choi Jin]
It is believed that the Democratic Party has been self-imposed. The Democratic Party seems to judge that there is no legal problem. Therefore, there is no legal problem even if the criminal trial is conducted separately for the crime of rebellion, and the unconstitutional trial of martial law and the crime of rebellion is impeached through two things. I think they judged that impeachment could be cited enough even with martial law. It seems that there was no problem because there was already precedent in the Park Geun Hye government that the legal judgment was not too difficult.Ma is politically far-fetched and likely to face headwinds. The general public, who is not familiar with the law, may misunderstand, "What are you doing, you've been talking about a rebellion like this, and you're taking out the crime of rebellion?"

In fact, the contents of the civil war in the impeachment inquiry remain the same. the presence or absence of the crime It means that only the trial will be dealt with separately in the criminal trial. In other words, to borrow the Democratic Party's expression, the Constitutional Court will quickly judge whether to impeach him or not.
So, from the standpoint of the people's power, of course, we caught a good attack. Therefore, the crime of rebellion is canceled and withdrawn. This part is considered to have given the people's power an excuse to fight back completely after defensive defense. As I said now, isn't the power of the people launching a total counterattack as if martial law has no problem at all? The Democratic Party of Korea should also be quite self-reflective in that it gave that excuse. Also, it is absolutely undesirable for the people's power to rise up like a wildfire just because they have caught something good. Therefore, the Constitutional Court needs to quickly clean up that part of the traffic. Didn't the Constitutional Court actually say that? This is quite loud now because we said we would decide, but I think it will go down quickly. In particular, whether to deal with the crime of rebellion or not, and whether the Constitutional Court will deal with it clearly and clearly, I think that the backstory and aftermath will disappear in the future.

[KIM HYEONGJUN]
The National Assembly proposes an impeachment motion when impeaching. If you look at the prosecution plan, 70% is related to the crime of rebellion. And 30% is about emergency martial law. Then, is it general and common sense to do it with the rest except for the 70% crime of rebellion? So I'd like to look into this. I would like to ask the people, do you think it is right to exclude the crime of rebellion that the opposition party is talking about now? Perhaps in a lot of areas, the Democratic Party of Korea has been attacking, saying that all of them are rebellion gangsters, but in the case of Representative Ahn Cheol Soo and Kim Jae-seop, aren't they saying that if the crime of rebellion was eliminated, I wouldn't have agreed? So two things can be a big issue right now.

The first is, through what process did the Democratic Party of Korea go through to get rid of the crime of rebellion? Who led the way? At first, the media reported that the Constitutional Court recommended it. However, the Constitutional Court said yesterday that it had never recommended it, but I think these things should be clearly revealed and the truth should be revealed.

[Anchor]
I see. Let's stop here. So far, I have been with Kim Hyung-joon, chair professor at Baejae University, and Choi Jin, president of the Presidential Leadership Institute. Thank you.