Han's Attack on Roh: Why?

The move is read as an attempt to ride on recent social controversies, including noise about assassination-related content. The harsh rhetoric is seen as a deliberate strategy to draw attention and consolidate supporters.

Questions were raised about what political meaning there is in re-summoning a case from 17 years ago.

Because the former president has died and there is no remaining criminal liability, the claims cannot be verified legally. Critics also point out that the amounts in contemporary reporting and in Lee In-gyu's memoir do not match.

Critics argue that citing a former investigation chief's memoir without any court ruling exposes the baselessness of the claims, and that the assertion that the Democratic Party exploits Roh's legacy is also factually wrong.

Lee In-gyu, former head of the central investigation unit, published a memoir (2023) arguing that if Moon Jae-in, then a lawyer, had done better, Roh Moo-hyun would not have died. That claim has been used to attack former President Moon.

Through this content, Han is seen as trying to consolidate supporters and reapply the winning formula from Busan through SNS-driven politics.

Han stated as fact that Roh received 300 million won and a watch, but the 2009 prosecutorial records leave the recipient vaguely as 'the individual or family.'

Suspect interrogation records compiled by prosecutors are not admissible as evidence in court. Prosecutorial reform discussions arose from problems with such records, not from fabricated indictments.

Critics say that Han's one-sided citation of prosecutors' announcement materials distorts the facts.

Because the allegations involving Roh have never been legally verified, critics argue Han's remarks are heavily politically motivated.

Analysts say public trust that prosecutors wield the sword of justice has collapsed since Yoon Suk Yeol's impeachment.

Critics say Han's approach of emphasizing his prosecutorial experience and public standing may no longer work, and that his habit of never conceding and speaking in clipped, assertive tones could backfire politically.

Critics say commentator Yu Si-min lacks enough detailed legal knowledge: he only recently recognized the basic issue of separating investigating and prosecuting prosecutors. Some suggest his silence stems from this gap in knowledge about specific legal and factual issues.

Han's father-in-law, Jin Yeong-gu, a former head of the Supreme Prosecutors' Office's public security division, was arrested over the Korea Mint strike-inducement case, and his brother-in-law has an arrest record for sexual assault charges. Critics worry these facts weaken the legitimacy of Han's criticism.

Commentator Ha Heon-gi called Han's assault on former President Roh a strategic miscalculation.

Attacking the deceased expands no support and only provokes voter backlash, and it does not damage the Democratic Party's political mythology either.

He criticized this political impatience as something that will boomerang back on Han himself.

Critics say the Democratic camp has not responded forcefully to Han's attack on Roh.

In particular, Yu Si-min and the Roh Moo-hyun Foundation have stayed silent even though they should be speaking out most, and many lament the absence of Yu, the opposition's strategic voice, from the political fight.

Both the father-in-law's Korea Mint strike-inducement case and the brother-in-law's sexual assault charge were problems within the prosecution, and critics say Han has shown no responsible attitude toward his family's past crimes.

Critics also point to a contradiction: the networks of ex-prosecutors implicated in corruption have become the very driving force behind the prosecutorial reform the Democratic government pursues, and while these figures claim they will break the myth of prosecutorial reform, the perpetrators in question are all former prosecutors.

Critics say it is hard to explain the contradictory attitude that whatever he does is right, while the same conduct by others becomes a target for attack.

Analysts argue Han is trying to expand his appeal to both moderates and the far right, aligning with a global rightward trend, with a political aim behind it.

This is read as an effort to draw a line against the Yoon Suk Yeol administration and build his own identity, and his mention of Roh is interpreted as part of a negative strategy to consolidate supporters.

Because the opposition is not responding, Han gains the advantage of continuing his political moves without risk.

Critics say Han's remarks about Roh focus on fostering hatred and mockery rather than political discourse, and lack any strategic value for mobilizing particular groups.

The approach is said to resemble that of 'cyber wreckers,' a crude style of politics.

Critics note that Seoul Mayor Oh Se-hoon's activities around Gwanghwamun had a specific target and context, whereas Han's criticism of Roh only wounds the bereaved family and supporters.

This shows the limits of goal-less negative politics carried out without any constructive positive agenda.

No one has risen to become a top leader while failing to shed a sniper image, making Han's current state a stumbling block on the road to the presidency.

His hostility toward the entire Democratic Party, lack of dialogue and compromise, and absence of public achievements or substantive agenda have drawn sharp criticism even from conservative media.