<img alt="Kim Eun-hye, former Senior Secretary to the President for Public Relations, briefing on the controversy over President Yoon Seok-yeol‘s profanity in New York, USA, on September 22, 2022 (local time). /Yonhap News” class=”thumb_g_article” data-org-src=”https://t1.daumcdn.net/news/202411/01/journalist/20241101163057372vuyn.jpg” data-org-width=”870″ dmcf-mid=”6LdfEXMU3E” dmcf-mtype=”image” height=”auto” src=”https://img1.daumcdn.net/thumb/R658x0.q70/?fname=https://t1.daumcdn.net/news/202411/01/journalist/20241101163057372vuyn.jpg” width=”658″/>
Kim Eun-hye, former Senior Secretary to the President for Public Relations, briefing on the controversy over President Yoon Seok-yeol’s profanity in New York, USA, on September 22, 2022 (local time). /Yonhap News
In the appeal trial of a lawsuit requesting corrective information regarding MBC’s report that President Yoon Seok-yeol used profanity about U.S. President Joe Biden, People Power Party lawmaker Kim Eun-hye, who was the senior secretary for public relations in the President’s Office, submitted a statement saying that President Yoon’s remarks were ‘just right to blow it up’. As a result of confirmation from President Yoon on the day of the slang controversy, it was revealed that the President himself responded that his comment was not ‘Biden’ but ‘Nalinalyeon’.
On the 1st, the 13th Civil Affairs Division of the Seoul High Court (Presiding Judge Gwang-seop Moon) held the third hearing for the appellate trial of the correction report claim lawsuit filed by the Ministry of Foreign Affairs against MBC. The Ministry of Foreign Affairs submitted the statement received from Rep. Kim to the court on October 10 prior to the trial. Representative Kim explained the report that President Yoon, who visited the United States in September 2022, spoke with President Biden for 48 seconds and said, “If these XXs do not approve in the National Assembly, what will Biden do because he is embarrassed?”
In a four-page statement, Rep. Kim wrote that the controversial President Yoon told him in detail what his remarks were. President Yoon also explained his usual language habits, saying that he calls the U.S. “Congress” and the Korean “National Assembly” differently. Rep. Kim said that he also shared this information with the then National Security Office Director Kim Seong-han after confirming it with the President.
The court, which began the trial in July, suggested the direction of the trial, saying that unlike the first trial, which focused on how President Yoon’s remarks ‘sounded’, they should check how President Yoon ‘said’. At the same time, he asked the Ministry of Foreign Affairs to obtain Rep. Kim’s statement, but Rep. Kim took the position that ‘it is impossible to write it because it could lead to being embroiled in another political controversy’, but submitted the statement three months later. The original text of the statement was not made public.
MBC, which received the statement, claimed that it was difficult to believe what Rep. Kim revealed. When Rep. Kim said that he met with President Yoon and received confirmation of his remarks, it was 11 pm on September 21, local time in the United States. However, former National Security Chief Kim, who was said to have received the confirmation information, met with reporters just an hour later and did not mention anything like ‘what if it blows up’. At the time, former National Security Chief Kim only said, “It is not appropriate to link private remarks to diplomatic results,” but did not correct the remarks, saying they were misinformed.
Rep. Kim held an official press conference only on the morning of the 22nd, the next day, U.S. local time. Meanwhile, there was no additional explanation provided by the President’s Office overnight. In Korean time, the explanation was given only at midnight, 15 hours after the use of profanity toward President Biden was first reported on the morning of the 22nd, so the controversy during the day became a fait accompli. Even after returning to Korea, officials at the President’s Office went back and forth for several days, saying they could not confirm for sure what the remarks were about.
The court ultimately dismissed Rep. Kim’s application as a witness. MBC requested to call Rep. Kim as a witness when the appeal trial began. At the time, the court postponed the adoption of witnesses, saying, “After receiving the written response, if it is insufficient to determine the substantive truth, let’s think about it a little.” Rep. Kim cannot be held liable for perjury even if there are lies in the answer he submitted this time.
The Ministry of Foreign Affairs requested that MBC be sentenced now, saying it was unable to make new claims. The court also asked to set a sentencing date, saying that MBC had not argued sufficiently. The court accepted MBC’s request to allow one more argument and will hold the final argument date on the 13th of next month. Presiding Judge Moon Gwang-seop, who has emphasized an amicable agreement, concluded the trial that day and asked both sides again if they were willing to engage in mediation.
