Shin Seong-sik, head of anti-corruption force, Supreme Prosecutors’ Office (Photo = Yonhap News)-It was confirmed on the 14th that the prosecutor Han Dong-hoon designated the chief prosecutor Shin Seong-sik (prosecutor) as the person who confirmed the contents of the misinformation to KBS in relation to KBS’s’Channel A attempted misinformation case.
The Channel A case is the main reason for a disciplinary claim against Prosecutor General Yoon Seok-yeol, and as a member of the deliberation, Prosecutor Shin attends the prosecutor’s disciplinary committee scheduled on the 15th. While question marks are raised over the qualifications of the prosecutor Shin, who is involved in the case, as a disciplinary committee member, President Yoon is considering an application to evade the new prosecutor.
In July, prosecutor Han filed a complaint with the Seoul Southern District Prosecutor’s Office against a reporter and’an investigative agency official who provided false investigation information to KBS’, saying that the reputation of KBS’s misinformation was damaged. Afterwards, a prosecutor, at the beginning of this month, submitted a written opinion specifying the relevant investigative agency official as the new prosecutor. A prosecutor’s office explained on the day that “the opinion was submitted in order to urge the prosecution to investigate.”
KBS’s misinformation related to the Channel A incident came just after former Channel A reporter Lee Dong-jae was arrested in July, and the’smoking case of detention’ and’the context of the competition’ was conducted by the former reporter in February at the prosecutor’s office and the Busan Prosecutors’ Office It contains the content of the conversation we had. KBS said, “Former reporter Lee mentioned the need to report on Chairman Yoo Si-min, such as that if the opposition party wins in the general election, President Yoon Suk-yeol will be empowered, and a prosecutor also mentioned encouragingness along with words that meant helping.” I introduced the contents.
KBS apologized when the former reporter and one prosecutor both protested that it was not true. In fact, a transcript of the conversation between the prosecutor’s prosecutor’s office and the Busan high prosecutor’s office related to this case was also released, but it was found that no conclusive evidence of “probate conspiracy” proved the criminal conspiracy with a prosecutor.
Prosecutor Han Dong-hoon (Photo = Yonhap News)-At the time of the report controversy, suspicion was raised that the core officer of the Seoul Central District Prosecutors’ Office was involved in the purpose of pressing a prosecutor, who is a key aide of President Yoon. At that time, the new prosecutor was the third chief prosecutor of the central district prosecutor’s office.
The Nambu District Prosecutor’s Office, who is investigating the case, said, “The specific allegations made by the complainant do not mean confirming the contents of the allegation or specifying the alleged person,” and said, “We will continue to investigate the related cases according to the usual procedures.” It is to the effect that the prosecution does not specify that the prosecutor Shin is suspicious.
Meanwhile, the Channel A case is also on the table as a major deliberation agenda at the disciplinary committee on the 15th, discussing the discipline of President Yoon. Justice Minister Choo Mi-ae, who is the right to request disciplinary action, believes that Yoon interfered with the investigation and inspection of the prosecutor in the case. The new prosecutor is also included among the members who will conduct disciplinary deliberation, so there are many voices inside and outside the prosecution, “Is it possible to conduct a fair deliberation?” With this in mind, President Yoon said, “We are considering whether to challenge the new prosecutor.”
If the prosecutor Shin is removed from the disciplinary committee due to this controversy, there may be a situation where the quorum of members (four) for the deliberation commencement is insufficient. Han-joong Jeong, a professor at the Graduate School of Law at Hankuk University of Foreign Studies, who is an official representative of the disciplinary committee, explained that in this case, the introduction of a reserve member could be considered.
–
