Court Reissues President Yoon's Arrest Warrant...Expiration date extension

■ Host: Yoo Da-won Anchor, Kim Myung-geun Anchor
■ Starring: Baek Jong-gyu, Social Affairs Reporter

* The text below may differ from the actual broadcast content, so please check the broadcast for more accurate information. Please specify [YTN New Square 8PM] when quoting.

[Anchor]
As previously mentioned, the court issued a warrant for the arrest of President Yoon on charges of rebellion, which was re-claimed by the Senior Civil Servant Corruption Investigations Unit, and the validity of the warrant has been extended. The joint investigation headquarters, which is joined by the Senior Civil Servant Corruption Investigations Unit and the police, is expected to soon execute President Yoon again through consultation. We will look into the emergency martial law investigation situation with reporter Baek Jong-kyu of the Ministry of Social Affairs. How are you? Yesterday, the Senior Civil Servant Corruption Investigations Unit again requested an arrest warrant for President Yoon Suk Yeol, but the news of the second arrest warrant was issued a little while ago.

[Reporter]
Yesterday afternoon, the Senior Civil Servant Corruption Investigations Unit re-applied an arrest warrant for President Yoon Suk Yeol. However, the news that it was issued a little while ago has been reported. It was issued in 10,000 days. This is the news about 7:10 p.m. The Joint Investigation Headquarters said this afternoon that it has re-issued an arrest warrant for President Yoon, who is suspected of a rebellion. Yesterday, the Senior Civil Servant Corruption Investigations Unit requested a warrant to extend the validity of President Yoon's warrant, and the court accepted it. President Yoon's arrest warrant issued by the court expired at midnight yesterday. In the first round, it took nearly 30 hours from the request for an arrest warrant to the issuance, but this time, the time from the request to the issuance was shortened as it was the second issuance. As a result, the Joint Investigation Headquarters has earned time to execute an arrest warrant for President Yoon. It is not yet known when the government will start executing the warrant.

[Anchor]
When the first arrest warrant was requested and issued, it was found that the validity period of the warrant was within 7 days. But this time, the Senior Civil Servant Corruption Investigations Unit announced that it would be difficult to confirm the validity of the warrant. What is it about?

[Reporter]
This is what the Senior Civil Servant Corruption Investigations Unit announced yesterday. I announced that it is difficult to confirm the expiration date of the re-claimed arrest warrant for President Yoon. When the first arrest warrant was issued on the 31st of last month, the Senior Civil Servant Corruption Investigations Unit disclosed the validity of the warrant. However, the execution of the warrant was blocked by strong opposition, and until yesterday, the last day of the expiration date, a rally for impeachment was held in front of the Hannam-dong residence. Failure to announce the validity of the second arrest warrant seems to be a measure to strengthen the clandestine nature of execution and investigation security. This is because if the validity of the warrant is known, the presidential security service can block it more closely. Some pointed out that they only buy time to prepare for the presidential security service. However, as the arrest process is expected to be difficult, it is highly likely that the warrant was extended than the validity period previously requested. The Senior Civil Servant Corruption Investigations Unit said yesterday that the warrant is usually valid for seven days, but it is also consulting with the police to apply for more than that.

[Anchor]
First of all, President Yoon Suk Yeol's side continues to say there is no need for arrest, but it is said to have issued an opinion. But it wasn't accepted in the end as the warrant was issued, right?

[Reporter]
That's right. President Yoon's side submitted an opinion to the court again that there is no need for arrest. The contents of the opinion were not disclosed. I also submitted a statement of opinion during the first warrant request. In response to this, I explained the contents at the time of President Yoon's representatives. That's what it was about. The request for an arrest warrant is unjust. It does not meet the requirements for a warrant. And he said that the Senior Civil Servant Corruption Investigations Unit does not have the right to investigate rebellion. At the same time, they used figurative expressions. It's like claiming ownership of the tree because the leaves came over the fence. It is strange to claim the right of the body just because it has the right of the tail. I used a figurative expression like this. It's an unfair warrant. They issued an opinion that it should be dismissed legally. It seems that similar information was included in the opinion this time. However, the court did not accept President Yoon's opinion this time and issued a warrant again.

[Anchor]
On the other hand, let's talk about the Senior Civil Servant Corruption Investigations Unit. When executing the first arrest warrant for President Yoon, there were criticisms that the Senior Civil Servant Corruption Investigations Unit did not prepare too well or responded complacently, but I think the Senior Civil Servant Corruption Investigations Unit attended the National Assembly Legislation and Judiciary Committee today and explained the details.
What was there to talk about?

[Reporter]
That's right. First of all, I didn't answer the reporters' questions on my way to work this morning. And today, there was a question about pending issues at the National Assembly Judiciary Committee in the afternoon. At this meeting, the ruling and opposition parties continued to criticize Director Oh Dong-woon. In response, Senior Airborne Officer Oh Dong-woon said, "We sincerely apologize to the public for the failure of the execution of the warrant." He also noted that it is very heartbreaking to see the law of law undermined due to the failure of properly executed arrest warrants. In addition, the judiciary emphasized that the arrest warrant properly issued by the judiciary is recognized as a judge's order to the presidential security office. He then emphasized that enforcing the order is the legitimate execution of the prosecutor's work and that it should not interfere for any reason. He also answered the question of whether there were concerns about the use of firearms by Minister Oh's security service. In any case, he explained that he felt various threats psychologically and physically and decided that he would have a bad effect due to a physical collision. He also said that criticism of the lack of preparation for the Senior Civil Servant Corruption Investigations Unit had occurred in many unforeseen parts of the enforcement process, and that he failed as a result and felt responsible. There was also a question about why the head of the security department prevented the arrest of the current criminal.
There was a little misunderstanding about this, he said, "We didn't all agree on the spot, but it was a judgment to prevent side effects from the collision." Director of Airborne Oh Dong-woon stressed that he will prepare thoroughly with the extraordinary determination that the second execution of the warrant is the last execution. However, when asked by Park Beom-gye of the Democratic Party of Korea whether President Yoon Suk Yeol thought there was a possibility that he might have fled, Oh said, "I am thinking about various possibilities," and when asked again, "Do you think there is a possibility that he may have hid or fled?" he answered, "Yes."

[Anchor]
The head of the Senior Civil Servant Corruption Investigations Unit apologized and said he would prepare thoroughly for the second execution of the warrant, but the arrest warrant was issued again. Then, it seems that the second arrest warrant will be executed soon, so can we break through the strong resistance of the security service? Are you getting ready?

[Reporter]
First of all, the Senior Civil Servant Corruption Investigations Unit started working with the police today. It seems that discussions have been made on when to execute the second warrant and how to do it. As there was strong resistance from the Presidential Security Service and the military during the execution of the first warrant, it is expected to increase the number of personnel deployed. Because you can't make the same mistake twice. They will continue to think about the timing and strategy of the arrest warrant. The police, who have decided to re-establish a coordination system with the Senior Civil Servant Corruption Investigations Unit, are also likely to be concerned about the re-execution of arrest warrants. It is known that the government is preparing countermeasures against additional preparations by the police department, such as the installation of barbed wire and the strengthening of the official residence. First of all, it is expected that we will need a little preparation time. It is predicted that the Senior Civil Servant Corruption Investigations Unit will try to re-enforce the arrest warrant within this week by creating a specific warrant execution strategy.

[Anchor]
The police threatened to take strong measures against the presidential security agency that interferes with the execution of the warrant if the second arrest warrant is executed, but are you also considering arresting the current criminal?

[Reporter]
Police have strongly insisted on the arrest of current offenders as officials from the Security Service blocked them from executing the first arrest warrant. However, it is said that the Senior Civil Servant Corruption Investigations Unit expressed reluctance. There were even the 3rd cordon, 1st, 2nd, and 3rd cordon, but when they reached the 3rd cordon, there were not many security guards, so they were able to arrest them. However, in the end, the arrest of the security service personnel failed. The Senior Civil Servant Corruption Investigations Unit also acknowledged this. They stopped the police because they judged that there was a risk of physical conflict in the situation at the time. Police, but this time, they emphasized their willingness to arrest President Yoon if the security service prevents him from re-executing his arrest warrant. He emphasized that the execution of the warrant against President Yoon Suk Yeol will also be more active. As we have also found out whereabouts of President Yoon, we will prepare more carefully for the arrest. As the security service is tightening its guard, such as setting up barbed wire, the police have also left room to consider what they can do when asked about the possibility of sending a criminal mobile or police commando. At the presidential residence on the 3rd, he seems to have expressed his will not to follow in the footsteps of failing to secure President Yoon's recruits due to the security service's hand-to-hand defense war.

[Anchor]
First of all, the security service is claiming to be legitimate. However, when the police executed the first warrant, they said it was confirmed that the security service mobilized general soldiers. Is there anything that goes against the legal aspect of this?

[Reporter]
Police said they confirmed that the Presidential Security Service mobilized ordinary soldiers during the execution of the arrest warrant for President Yoon. This fact was collected on the spot. It said it was confirmed through this evidence video. Police suspect that the 33rd Military Police Force and 55th Guard Corps soldiers under the command of the Security Service were used as "human walls" to block the arrest of President Yoon. In the process, it is suspected that there was an order from Chief of Security Park Jong-joon and Deputy Chief of Security Kim Sung-hoon. In order to find out this part, four commanders of the security service, including Minister Park, were booked and summoned. However, the security service denies the suspicion of putting soldiers in. The police believe that there is no difficulty in applying charges of obstructing the execution of special public affairs in relation to the command of the Security Service.

[Anchor]
However, the police are expressing their displeasure with the chief of security interfering with the execution of the warrant. Park Jong-joon, the chief of security who is suspected of obstructing the execution of the arrest warrant, refused to comply with the police's request to appear twice?

[Reporter]
That's right. The special police team notified Park Jong-joon, the head of the security service, to come out and be investigated twice. However, the bodyguard said it is difficult to attend because a lawyer has not been appointed. Inside the police, there is an atmosphere that they are dragging their feet when they have already requested attendance twice. Director Park is charged with obstructing the execution of President Yoon's arrest warrant by the Senior Civil Servant Corruption Investigations Unit, so the suspect is booked for obstructing the execution of special public affairs. Police also point out that they missed the timing to arrest Director Park. If the Senior Civil Servant Corruption Investigations Unit had not objected at the time of the first arrest warrant, Minister Park would have been arrested as a current offender. The security agency said it plans to appoint a lawyer to coordinate the schedule today and tomorrow. The police also notified the security chief of the 3rd attendance on the 10th. If Minister Park fails to comply with the third request for attendance, the police are expected to start a compulsory investigation, including applying for an arrest warrant. In the case of President Yoon, the second attendance was notified, but it did not come out. That's why I requested the execution of an arrest warrant and an arrest warrant was issued. First of all, it seems that the security service intends to break down the cordon in advance ahead of the execution of the arrest warrant. Show this intention, and the emphasis before arrest should not be blocked when executing the second arrest warrant at the scene. I'll punish you for blocking. It seems to have this meaning as well.

[Anchor]
There was a conflict between the Senior Civil Servant Corruption Investigations Unit and the police regarding the execution of an arrest warrant, and it seems to have been sealed for now. However, there are concerns that controversy may arise over the right to investigate in the future. In order to prevent this, an independent counsel is needed, and there are voices like this?

[Reporter]
That's right. This is also because there is a continuing dispute over the right to investigate. Regarding the execution of the arrest warrant, the Senior Civil Servant Corruption Investigations Unit and the police have dispelled the controversy. We reaffirmed the cooperation system with the Senior Civil Servant Corruption Investigations Unit and the police and started sealing the ribs. However, pressure is expected to increase to eliminate confusion in the investigation by launching a permanent and general special prosecutor. On December 10 last year, it passed the National Assembly's "Request for Investigation by the Haeyang Prosecutor to Investigate the Truth of Insurrection Acts through the Declaration of Unconstitutional Emergency Security." It is a permanent special prosecutor investigating all suspicions raised in connection with the declaration of emergency martial law. If necessary, the special prosecutor can request cooperation from the heads of related agencies such as the Supreme Prosecutors' Office and the National Police Agency, such as submitting related data such as case investigation records and evidence, and supporting the investigation. As it is possible to request dispatch to each agency, it is expected that the investigation will proceed at a rapid pace when a special prosecutor is introduced. Unlike the general special prosecutor, the president cannot veto the permanent special prosecutor. However, the process has actually stopped because Acting President Choi Sang-mok has not requested the recommendation of a special prosecutor candidate. Even if a special prosecutor is introduced, it will take a considerable amount of time from manpower composition to space. At a press conference today of the Korean Bar Association, he urged the rapid launch of a permanent special prosecutor. In the process of investigating the emergency martial law incident, he emphasized that the solution to all problems, including confusion, is to quickly launch a permanent special prosecutor.

[Anchor]
Earlier, the court issued an extension of the search for President Yoon and stated in the warrant that Articles 110 and 111 of the Criminal Procedure Act were not applied, but the president strongly opposed this. By the way, the court just explained this a little while ago, but you're saying there's no legal problem, right? [Reporter] Chun Dae-yup, the head of the court administration, expressed his position on the fact that Articles 110 and 111 of the Criminal Procedure Act do not apply when issuing a search warrant for the execution of President Yoon's arrest warrant. In a questioning on pending issues at the National Assembly Judiciary Committee, Minister Cheon explained that it was "following the mainstream view." As for whether or not to apply Article 110 of the Criminal Procedure Act, he added that many theories say that material seizure and search for human arrests are right to pursue differently. He also mentioned that the core of the rule of law is to respect what has been done in due process and to fight against it within the process. He also emphasized that if a warrant was issued through trial, he thought it would be appropriate to argue through procedures within the system, such as filing an objection. Earlier, Lee Soon-hyung, a senior judge in charge of warrants at the Seoul Western District Court, issued a search warrant for President Yoon, stating that Article 110 of the Criminal Procedure Act, which requires the approval of the person in charge of confiscation and search of places requiring military secrets, and Article 111 does not apply to confiscation of confidential items held and kept by public officials without the consent of their public offices or supervisory offices. In response, President Yoon filed an objection that it was illegal and invalid, but the court rejected it.

[Anchor]
As previously mentioned in our report, out-of-the-court public opinion battles are also intensifying regarding the impeachment trial of the Constitutional Court. The National Assembly and President Yoon are continuing to fight over the deletion of the rebellion, so what is the position of the National Assembly?

[Reporter]
Today, both the National Assembly and President Yoon expressed their respective positions. Let's take a look at the National Assembly's position first. The National Assembly's representatives refuted the controversy over the withdrawal of the reason for the prosecution of the rebellion. "The fact that the head of the rebellion's act of national constitutional disorder does not change a single letter," he stressed. "There is no change in making all acts of rebellion subject to judgment." However, he also mentioned that there is no reason for impeachment to ask him to judge the "crime" of the rebellion. It is argued that the subject of judgment under the impeachment motion is the facts related to emergency martial law, and that the crimes of rebellion and abuse of authority are only added as a kind of evaluation. He then stressed that the impeachment trial is not a trial that judges what crimes an act falls under, saying that it will be judged as a violation of the constitution in accordance with the nature of the impeachment trial process. If the Constitutional Court accepts the National Assembly's request, it will determine whether President Yoon Suk Yeol has violated various constitutional obligations. They argue that a prolonged impeachment trial could lead to confusion in state affairs and that a separate resolution is not needed, rather than changing the reasons for prosecution.

[Anchor]
On the other hand, President Yoon's side argues that the Constitutional Court should reject the National Assembly's impeachment if the impeachment trial does not deal with the violation of the criminal law, that is, rebellion.

[Reporter]
In the reason for the prosecution, he emphasized that withdrawing the crime of rebellion is not one of the two reasons for the prosecution. He explained that 80% of the impeachment charges are withdrawn. I'm arguing that it should be dismissed. When the claim is inappropriate, your decision is to close the lawsuit without judging the original matter. He then asked how he could determine whether it was a crime of rebellion under the criminal law, and how to judge whether the act of rebellion violates the Constitution by deciding the emergency martial law as a rebellion. He also emphasized that suspending the exercise of authority and prosecuting impeachment because the president committed rebellion is a completely different assessment from prosecuting impeachment because the president's act of declaring emergency martial law is not appropriate. President Yoon Suk Yeol submitted an additional opinion to the Constitutional Court yesterday in this regard.

[Anchor]
First of all, there was a claim that the Constitutional Court recommended the removal of the rebellion crime. Have you come up with your position on this?

[Reporter]
The Constitutional Court says it is not true at all. The National Assembly also expressed its position today. The National Assembly was also misleading in this regard. He also said that it was not recommended by the Constitutional Court. Today, the Constitutional Court emphasized that the reason for the impeachment of the rebellion is a matter for the court to judge. Until the Constitutional Court makes a decision, the battle between the National Assembly and the President of Yoon Suk Yeol is expected to continue for a while.

[Anchor]
I see. So far, we've been with Baek Jong-gyu, a reporter from the Ministry of Social Affairs. Thank you for talking today.