[Issue Plus] "Double Special Prosecutors Act" was rejected by the plenary session.Reissuance of President Yoon's Arrest Warrant

■ Host: Lee Yeo-jin, anchor Jang Won-seok
■ Starring: Chung Kwang-jae, spokesman for the People's Power, Park Sung-min, former member of the Democratic Party of Korea

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

[Anchor]
Let's take a look at today's Jungkook situation with the two. Chung Kwang-jae, spokesman for the People's Power, Park Sung-min, former member of the Democratic Party of Korea, came out. Hello? Today, the independent counsel law and the independent counsel law for Kim Gun-hee were re-voted at the plenary session, but all were rejected. Nevertheless, if only two more votes were cast in favor of 198 votes, it would have been passed this time. What do you think? How did you like it?

[Jung Kwang Jae]
I think it's actually an expected result. With the political conflict at its maximum, we expected that more than eight votes would be passed by the two special prosecutors because of the fact that more than eight votes were cast in our party. In particular, it would not have been easy to approve the bill at the moment because floor leader Kwon Sung-dong stipulated that the two bills can destroy the so-called conservatives, and that lawmakers who want to approve should consider leaving the party. Rather, I diagnosed that there were a lot more votes in favor of it than I thought.

[Anchor]
The case of the Kim Gun-hee Special Prosecutor Act has decreased compared to the last vote. How did you see this?

[Park Sungmin]
Well, I don't understand it well, but I think Kwon Sung-dong, the floor leader, is now coming out in various articles, and there are reports that if you don't follow the party's stance on the bilateral special prosecution law, leave the party if you don't answer, do you think I'm joking because I don't answer?

So, I wonder if there were people who couldn't stand the pressure because they had been suppressing lawmakers who wanted to support the president in this way and threatening to do so, and as a result, I think that lawmakers might be growing antipathy toward the party leadership's act of protecting the president too much. I think that if the Democratic Party of Korea corrects and rewrites the parts that the people's power has pointed out as toxic clauses in certain bills, there will be no more justification to reject them or reject them with party opinions, so I think both bills can be passed at the next vote.

[Anchor]
As we just broke news, the Democratic Party of Korea said it would change the independent counsel law to a third-party recommendation and propose it as a top priority, but wouldn't this increase the possibility of passing it?

[Jung Kwang Jae]
I very much welcome this forward-thinking way of the Democratic Party. Because in the end, politics has its own arguments, but we have to find a compromise among them. The reason why our party had no choice but to oppose the two special prosecution bills is that the unconstitutional element, the so-called unconstitutionality, has not been removed as in the last time.

The core of the unconstitutionality was that the National Assembly was trying to exercise the right to appoint and dismiss public officials held by the administration, and if the ruling and opposition parties agree on what a third party recommends, this is enough to find an agreement. However, among the third-party independent counsel laws that the Democratic Party is talking about now, the so-called third-party independent counsel bill has been pushed forward in the past, although a third-party independent counsel bill has been conducted. I don't think our party will be able to reach an agreement if we continue to insist on unlimited non-soil rights, that is, this power to reject prosecutors recommended by third parties if the Democratic Party does not want to.

[Anchor]
The Democratic Party of Korea was known to reissue the Insurrection Special Prosecutor Act by adding foreign exchange attraction to the investigation target, but if a third party's recommendation and foreign exchange attraction are included, the ruling party will likely protest. What do you think?

[Park Sungmin]
Watching the ruling party's decision to reject the bill again, I think that even if it proposes an amendment, some people will definitely move to reject it again as a result. In particular, these 45 lawmakers who visited their official residence will probably resist no matter how much they propose an amendment and compromise with the power of the people, but in this case, isn't it a crime that means attracting or sympathizing with foreign exchange that could threaten national security?

However, the reason why this came out was that they pointed out that they purposely provoked North Korea and induced local warfare to justify the declaration of martial law, and that they included this part because they have been briefed on it. There were actually a lot of different situations.

There was a saying in Roh Sang-won's notebook that the NLL should induce North Korea's attack, or that Kim Yong-hyun was almost on the verge of martial law, and that the special prosecution law should be carried out including foreign exchange crimes because there were such things as ordering the strike from the ground against the filth balloon.

However, if this happens, I think the members of the People's Power will be divided in half. Some say that there is no more justification to reject it, that if you propose an amendment, you should consider this part, and if you include it, you should go. Some say that the intention to bring down the president seems too clear.

[Anchor]
Do you have any plans to propose a self-insurrection special prosecutor law in the power of the people? [Jung Kwang-jae] We haven't discussed it in detail yet, but I can't help but raise the issue of including the foreign exchange crime in the special prosecution bill. You want to include the foreign exchange crime, which is difficult to legally rule in the special prosecution, when you say you will get an impeachment trial excluding the civil war that has been included in the impeachment trial? This is typically an act of misleading public opinion in favor of one's own supporters, so there must be a clear provision that it is a foreign country in order for foreign exchange crimes to be formed, but North Korea is not a foreign country under our constitution.

When we consider those things comprehensively, I think attracting foreign exchange crimes is just a propaganda to emphasize to those who support them that President Yoon Suk Yeol is a person who is accused of foreign exchange as well as civil war.

[Anchor]
North Korea is not a foreign country under the constitution, what do you think about this?

[Park Sungmin]
However, if legal experts say they are already willing to do this, they can be punished for foreign exchange. There's a story like this. So if the president and former Minister Kim Yong-hyun really deliberately tried to induce North Korea's provocation and purposely increase tensions between countries to create a state of war, thinking about even local wars, this is clearly a foreign exchange crime. Therefore, as various circumstances have emerged, the investigation is inevitable and the fact-finding is inevitable.

And this part seems to be true to some extent. Because let's first disclose not only the origin hitting instruction but also the video that we didn't even request from the Ministry of Unification. In fact, it seems to me that the purpose was clear to some extent from the fact that these movements were made when such videos that could stimulate North Korea and it is very important to identify this and punish those responsible.

This seems to be an indispensable element in order to quell the chaos of the country and in the process of revealing the entire emergency martial law situation that should not have happened this time.

[Anchor]
The Democratic Party of Korea quickly expressed its intention to repeat it this time, but it was rejected anyway, and it lost momentum in leading the impeachment process. What do you think about this evaluation?

[Park Sungmin]
Rather, I think the people's anger was more stimulated by the people's power. In a way, I think we are gaining more momentum for impeachment or even holding the president accountable in the future. What do you think when the people see it, even though it may have been a failure in the National Assembly?

The president has committed illegal martial law and is not even being investigated while holding out like that, but I think the National Assembly will think that lawmakers of the People's Power do not even support the independent counsel law. Therefore, rather, the political power for the Democratic Party is being added by the actions of the people's power. So in a way, we think that the foundations are being laid to work with a little more confidence, but I think the important thing is to let it pass anyway.

The party's forward-looking position to propose various amendments like this is a very wise judgment because I think it is true that no matter how many times the independent counsel for rebellion has been proposed, there is no face in front of the people.

[Anchor]
People say that the goal is to make a resolution before the Lunar New Year holiday. What do you think?

[Jung Kwang Jae]
Considering the National Assembly schedule, I can't help but point out that the Democratic Party is in too much hurry. Things that have been done in such a hurry are not going well. I think the same is true about the impeachment trial and the arrest warrant. Since the Democratic Party of Korea has held huge seats in the National Assembly since the April 10 general election, the operation of the National Assembly is unilaterally run by the Democratic Party without reflecting our party's will.

In fact, physically speaking, our party has no choice but to be dragged away, but if the Democratic Party does this way, it can be a self-destructive measure that cannot lead to cooperation, so the Democratic Party cannot help but think that this is a part of the obsession to quickly move to the early presidential election phase and ensure that the presidential election takes place before Chairman Lee Jae-myung is deprived of his right to run for election.

This will not help the Democratic Party at all, so time is not important, but please consider how to reach an agreement and take legitimacy procedurally.

[Anchor]
On the other hand, the Seoul Western District Court issued another arrest warrant for President Yoon Suk Yeol last night. It is known that the judge is different from the first time, but the fact that the arrest warrant was issued twice anyway can it be said that the Senior Civil Servant Corruption Investigations Unit acknowledged the issue of the right to investigate the rebellion.

[Jung Kwang Jae]
I think it's an expected result. I had anticipated that this warrant would be issued from the time I re-claimed it to the Western District Court, and in fact, our party is constantly pointing out this issue. As mentioned in the Corruption Investigations Unit Act, the Corruption Investigations Unit must obtain a warrant through the Seoul Central District Court. I think it would have been better if I had received it from another court to secure its legitimacy because it was a judicial decision anyway, so it is true that President Yoon Suk Yeol's situation is urgent now because the court has an excuse that President Yoon Suk Yeol's residence is due to the Seoul Western District Court.

Although the warrant was issued twice and refusing to comply with the warrant could attract the support of our party's supporters or those who support President Yoon Suk Yeol, the people as a whole have no choice but to evaluate that the president is in a position of urgency in many ways.

[Anchor]
If so, do you think it was not issued if the Seoul Central District Court filed a claim?

[Jung Kwang Jae]
The possibility cannot be ruled out, and the president said today that if an arrest warrant or arrest warrant is requested through legal procedures elsewhere, he will comply with court proceedings. This means that the president's office also has enough fear and concern about the physical conflict and bloodshed that could occur in the process of requesting the second warrant, whether tomorrow or the day after tomorrow.

As the two trains are about to collide, they have changed the rails to a certain extent, but in this situation, I think the Senior Civil Servant Corruption Investigations Unit needs to form a consensus that the worst situation should be avoided. In the end, as our party and the president have said, I think a new way can be found if we transfer it again and prevent the police from refuting the president's logic in due process.

[Anchor]
Lawyer Yoon Gap-geun held a press conference today and said, "If the Senior Civil Servant Corruption Investigations Unit requests an arrest warrant or indicts you, you will follow, but you cannot comply with the procedures in the Western District Court and must go through the Central District Court." How did you see this?

[Park Sungmin]
I think it's lame. It's lame, it's very lame. What did the president say in front of the people at first? I've made it clear that I won't avoid legal liability issues. And then look at the situation behind it. Why was the president even requested and issued an arrest warrant? The warrant was issued because he did not respond to the request for attendance without justifiable reasons. And you keep saying that there is some kind of relationship between the judges of the Western District Court and the Democratic Party, but this is a conspiracy theory.

I think people who come up with conspiracy theories for fraudulent elections or those who come up with conspiracy theories about judges have similar thoughts. So you've already told the court that it's not illegal to seek and issue a warrant in the Western District Court, and what did President Yoon Suk Yeol do about the last arrest warrant? I filed an objection.

But it was rejected. And clearly, the court cleared up all the issues. Regarding the arrest warrant, he said that he could not dispute the issuance itself, said that the part issued by the Western District Court was not illegal, and that he only interpreted the law on the part that indicated the exceptions and violated legislative rights.I've already organized everything that I can't see like this.

In the first place, the world view of the president of Yoon Suk Yeol and the lawyer is that the arrest warrant issued by the court is illegal. That's why I said disciplinary action against judges. Then let's say that one thing I want to ask is that if so, let's say it was issued by requesting the Central District Court. Then, will you need it then?

At that time, all the security service staff were bitten and asked if they would walk out and do it, but I don't think this will be the case. Because the president has already shown his willingness not to respond to the investigation. I talked about it like this as a specific example. Didn't you say the impeachment trial comes first?

What that means is that I'm not going to respond to the ongoing investigation and I'm going to comply with the Constitutional Court procedure. I've shown that it's a priority, so no matter how many times I talk about it during the investigation, all of those things are just excuses. And one more thing to point out is that if a suspect asks you to get a warrant from somewhere, I will respond. How can you say that?

How and what right is the suspect talking about those things? As a result, I will tell you that all this would not have happened if you voluntarily attended, but you have come to the present situation because you have violated the laws and principles that you should have followed in the first place.

[Anchor]
Even if a warrant is issued by the Central District Court, it will be the same attitude, what do you think of these claims?

[Jung Kwang Jae] How do you know without trying
? The president said that. If an arrest warrant is requested or the Central District Court, not the Seoul Western District Court, said it would faithfully comply with the trial process, so if the president does not respond to the investigation and does not comply with the execution of the arrest warrant, the public will be much more opposed to the president. In the process of enforcing the law now, procedural legitimacy, or legal legitimacy, is very important.

Is Song Young-gil the representative of the Pine Tree Party a second trial decision today? Although he was arrested in court, he was found not guilty in the process of collecting evidence, so that is a serious matter of arresting the president. It is undeniable that law enforcement should be stricter and more accurate than ever because this has never been done in the past.

So I think it would be a good way to impeach the president with more legitimacy if the president created an environment that is difficult to deny. The president's office believes that if you are confident, you will comply with the warrant through the Seoul Central District Court.

[Park Sungmin]
So I have no choice but to ask the question of why the president, who is the suspect, judges that it is not a legitimate warrant. So, in the eyes of the suspect, President Yoon Suk Yeol, if there is an investigation method or a warrant request that doesn't suit my taste, is it all illegal? Is it legal if it suits the president's taste and illegal if it doesn't?

This attitude ignores the law, and even though the president was the president, he still has some sense of privilege, and even though his duties are suspended, the president is destroying the constitution himself. I look like this. So, the president's excuses and logic are actually not right at all.

How can the logic of illegality be established if it does not suit the taste of the president? And if it was an illegal warrant, it wouldn't have been claimed in the first place, and it wouldn't have been issued. I think it is absurd for the suspect to argue that the warrant issued by the court is illegal and not illegal.

[Jung Kwang Jae]
So, ideally, it would be right for President Yoon Suk Yeol to respond to the investigation within the judicial process. But the real situation now, what is a politician? We have to combine the reality of idealization. Considering the realistic situation, if so, we can think about what the president says. If the execution of the arrest warrant goes on intensely in the second round and bloodshed or civil war that is hard for us to imagine occurs once again, who should take responsibility for the division of public opinion, and of course, the biggest responsibility for that will have to be attributed to martial law on December 3rd, but I think it is the realm of politics now to discuss how to overcome this wisely.

[Anchor]
In the first place, the president claimed that the request for an arrest warrant itself is not legal because the Senior Civil Servant Corruption Investigations Unit does not have the right to investigate the crime of rebellion. However, today, when the Senior Civil Servant Corruption Investigations Unit requests or prosecutes an arrest warrant, rather than an arrest warrant, please take a step back and think in good faith, considering that the people are suffering from severe cold weather and civil servants will have severe conflicts. That's what I said.

[Park Sungmin]
Should I say thank you? I don't understand what the president is saying at all. Are you talking about good intentions to hear thank you? So you want the president to applaud you for stepping back. But as I said before, if the president had claimed it to the Central District Court, he would have responded to it, and I think it's an excuse to do this.

Because you can see from the contradictory behavior of the president, who said he would put the impeachment trial first but did not receive documents from the Constitutional Court. Even now, an arrest warrant has been requested and issued, and if the president continues to resist in the process of executing it, it will be criticized again, so it is a kind of justification. He's explaining his own reason for not responding to the arrest.

But as I said earlier, if it was an illegal warrant, it would not have been issued in the first place. And if the court had judged that the Senior Civil Servant Corruption Investigations Unit had no authority to investigate, it would not have issued a warrant. So, why do you keep discussing illegality about the warrants that have already been issued, and now that it is extended for the second time, it seems that they are preaching this by building their own logic again. As a result, I think it is nothing more than an incitement to give logic to supporters.

[Anchor]
Anyway, since the Dong-A Ilbo has issued a second warrant, it will be executed, but the security agency seems to be fully prepared. I think I made up for the shortcomings in the first round, how can I enter this time?

[Jung Kwang Jae]
First of all, I think it is right that the Senior Civil Servant Corruption Investigations Unit and the police have the initiative in this execution. As time goes by, the cause of the security service has to be reduced in reality, and as Supreme Council member Park said, it is true that there are many public opinions within the judicial system that the warrant should be observed anyway.

Nevertheless, what I said earlier is that I think it would be better to come up with a political solution. The most fundamental solution is to respond to the investigation because President Yoon Suk Yeol himself said he would not avoid legal and political issues. In the second case, acting chief Choi Sang-mok can say that the security agency should not protect him, but I think the second issue is practically difficult.

If so, in reality, the president has no choice but to actively respond to the investigation, but this is also very unlikely now. If so, the police, who can't argue about the way the president talked and the procedural legitimacy at all, can issue an arrest warrant. I'm telling you with an urgent heart to prevent the worst.

[Anchor]
The expiration date of the arrest warrant is closed to the public. I wonder when this will be executed now and how it will be possible.

[Park Sungmin]
This time, I'm going to put the organization's fate on the line. I think this idea is in the Senior Civil Servant Corruption Investigations Unit, and I think the police will not follow the same failures as last time. And he seems to be thinking of putting in a lot of these people who have a lot of experience in arresting them at the scene, and the security office built a human wall to prevent this, didn't it? I've already experienced various situations, so I've learned to some extent.

So, I think the police are thinking about sending commandos this time, so the will to arrest is very clear, and I've checked a lot of these things that can be used to make this arrest happen.

So, no matter how much the security office is strengthening this residence itself with barbed wire, it is necessary to mobilize various police commandos, armored vehicles, and special vehicles. I think the time has come to exercise overwhelming physical force for the execution of arrest warrants.

[Anchor]
However, the opposition party raised suspicions about Yoon Suk Yeol's presidential escape. What do you think about this coming out?

[Jung Kwang Jae]
I think there are a lot of things that the opposition party is insisting on too much. Rep. Choo Mi-ae also raised such suspicions that the bodyguard recently ordered the firing of live ammunition, but the bodyguard is not at all true. He said he would respond legally. Where would the president of our country go if he went? In the movie title, a detective says that.

Our country has nowhere to run. The sea is on three sides. To the north is North Korea. Where would the president go? In fact, a media outlet caught a camera walking back and forth around the presidential residence in Yoon Suk Yeol today. So, I think we should avoid the appearance of unconditionally attacking President Yoon Suk Yeol because he is now in a tight spot, using the plausible framework of reporting.

Conspiracy-theoretic tip-offs, these are really not the party that the Democratic Party dreams of becoming a responsible authoritarian party. Then you have to refrain from these things.

[Anchor]
Now, the power of the people has even claimed that the Democratic Party of Korea and the National Police Agency are in an illegal internal communication situation. He said he would take legal action, pointing to Democratic Party lawmaker Lee Sang-sik's SNS that he served as a messenger between the party and the National Assembly.

[Park Sungmin]
So, I don't think it's appropriate to act like the power of the people has caught the number of cases. Of course, I think it was a little too much if I look at whether such SNS posts were appropriate in the current situation. Because I thought I could have given you an unnecessary excuse.
But look at the content.

It seems that the timing itself was trying to figure out the situation in relation to the execution of the warrant at a time when the first arrest warrant was expiring, rather than the fact that it served as a messenger between the National Assembly and the Democratic Party instructed them to catch someone innocent.

In fact, it is not strange to try to contact, visit, or meet with the noodles in such a situation. You can definitely ask and communicate about current issues. But if you look at it now, it's as if you're trying to use the word internal connection, it should be like this.

In the case of the National Assembly, there is a position that President Yoon Suk Yeol should not be arrested and the Democratic Party should arrest him, and if a lawmaker from the police approached and said, "Let's go to arrest him," it could be said that it was an internal connection and that he received an order from the Democratic Party of Korea, but it is not such a situation.

In the case of the National Assembly, the will to execute arrest warrants is very strong and the Democratic Party is strong, but the deadline is coming to an end, so what are you going to do with the security service? It was a process of communicating with various sites. So I think that's what we should see through communication, and the word "internal connection" is too much.

[Anchor]
Rep. Lee deleted the controversial message that it was a messenger from SNS anyway. After that, he said that he was a police officer and had normal communication, what do you think?

[Jung Kwang Jae]
I'd like to look at it with a station branch. Lawmaker Lee Chul-kyu recently visited the police and should think about the future. How much criticism did you get for talking about this once? He is criticized for his remarks, but he is a former police officer and a member of the National Assembly's Public Administration and Security Committee. But it served as a messenger between the National Investigation Headquarters? The National Investigation Headquarters has independent investigation rights. The Democratic Party is not the subject to say anything.

But if we said this, shouldn't we know what role we played as messengers and what contents came and went? I think it's a natural procedure to raise a problem with that part. Rep. Lee Sang-sik did something very inappropriate. At this point, we don't know what kind of messenger the main politician of the Democratic Party played in the National Investigation Headquarters. So, it's a part where we have to look into what we talked about.

[Park Sungmin]
But I don't think it's a problem to be compared to lawmaker Lee Chul-kyu's, and it can't be seen on the same line. Isn't it because Rep. Lee Chul-kyu defended the security service staff by telling them to think about their future? At the same time, the intention of the police is clear. Didn't you tell me to virtually prevent the execution of the arrest warrant?

So, it seems to be actually saying to put a brake on the process of executing a legally issued warrant, so it can be a problem for lawmakers, who are constitutional institutions that must comply with the law, to step up and urge illegality, and as I said earlier, isn't the direction of the Democratic Party and the National Assembly similar? We have to arrest him. But look at it now. Rep. Lee Chul-kyu seems to be on the side that he should not be arrested.

Don't arrest me. But isn't the police actually moving to arrest you now? In a situation where there is a conflict of will, it is actually a threat for a member of the National Assembly to meet and think about the future. So at the same time, I think it was very inappropriate for a member of the National Assembly to come forward and say something illegal.

[Anchor]
About 40 members of the People's Power Party of Korea who will last June tried to protect President Yoon in front of his Hannam-dong residence, and floor leader Kwon Sung-dong said that the leadership should not go to the presidential residence.

[Jung Kwang Jae]
I think floor leader Kwon Sung-dong made a good strategic judgment. Because it seems that the party is now divided over how far it should distance itself from the president so that the expression that our party is in a presidential dilemma is not wrong. I was actually surprised by the fact that about 40 active lawmakers went to Hannam-dong's residence and gathered to prevent the execution of arrest warrants.

So many MPs have gone? I think about 20 people will be able to go if we go a lot. I thought we could focus on the so-called pro-Yoon lawmakers, but in this respect, we recognize that the overall policy of our party is not to protect the president, but to protect the judicial system and constitutional order because the execution of warrants is outside the judicial system.

It is very burdensome for the public to recognize that this is really to protect the president's individual, so floor leader Kwon Sung-dong is saying this, and more than half of the lawmakers are still not participating. As for how to establish a relationship with the president in the future, there are various opinions within the party, so I think it is time to find one direction little by little.

[Anchor]
Shall we talk about what came out of the Judiciary Committee yesterday? Chung Chung-rae, chairman of the Judiciary Committee, said that President Yoon will be sentenced to death at a criminal trial and that he will be sentenced to death, which has been disrupted for a while. What do you think of this controversy?

[Park Sungmin]
I think some of you might think it was too much, but I understand how you feel. And actually, it's not that wrong. Because the crime of rebellion itself is a very serious crime, there are only three. It's one of the three, the death penalty, life imprisonment, and Muji Treasury. I should first say that the crimes committed by the president are very serious, and the judiciary committee talked about the battle between the Democratic Party and the people these days minus the crime of rebellion under the criminal law. First of all, I think it came out while we were talking about this being different from the facts.

Therefore, the Constitutional Court explains that it will fight issues related to constitutional violations, and that it has left the facts about the act of rebellion intact. However, lawmakers of the People's Power continue to make remarks that seem to mislead the facts.

to judge a crime of rebellion under criminal law Since you are talking about it as if you were saying that there was no crime of rebellion with the exception of it, I think you should consider it to some extent because it came out of the workshop.

[Anchor]
Now, among the reasons for President Yoon's impeachment, the dispute continues over the withdrawal of the crime of rebellion under the criminal law. The National Assembly, which made the remarks as if the Constitutional Court had recommended the withdrawal of the rebellion, is now explaining that the remarks were a slip of the tongue. How did you see this?

[Jung Kwang Jae]
The most basic reason why this is controversial is whether Lee Jae-myung will run for president early. After all, if the Constitutional Court decides whether it is possible to impeach the crime of rebellion through this, it is clear that it will take a long time, so let's take this out and do something else. When the impeachment bill was voted on, the most basic reason, that is, 12 members of our party approved it.

The biggest reason why 12 people voted for it is related to the alleged rebellion in the impeachment inquiry. It's hard for our party members to agree on the idea of excluding this and only proceeding with the impeachment. I don't think the Constitutional Court will be able to vote again in the National Assembly because it has physically said that it can be interpreted at the discretion of the court.Of course, you have to raise this much problem. Even if we are fraudulent impeachment, this is nothing for Democrats to say.

Because I definitely said I'd sell steamed buns, but I didn't. Regarding this, I think that the Democratic Party should really apologize first for this.

[Anchor]
Shall we hear a little bit about what you think of this argument?

[Park Sungmin]
First of all, I didn't exclude the crime of rebellion. So I'm saying that I won't argue with the Constitutional Court whether or not the crime of rebellion is established. So, from the point of view of the criminal law, this part was organized that it was correct to argue in criminal trials, and the issue was sorted out. The fact that there was an act of rebellion is the same. The contents of the
rebellion act remain the same, and the part that applies to it, and what to judge it by, is a summary of the judgment criteria to focus on the constitution, not to say that there was no crime of rebellion.

[Anchor]
I see. I'll cut it short here today. Chung Kwang-jae, spokesman for the People's Power, Park Sung-min, former member of the Democratic Party of Korea. Thank you.