Kim Seung-won Admits to Falsified Address, Refutes Allegations of Favoritism

Kim, who had previously refrained from media exposure, directly stated his position today and vowed to clarify all allegations raised against him.

Critics suggest that this was a politically motivated investigation by the Yoon Seok-yeol administration, aimed at linking it to Chairman Lee Jae-myung. It is similar to cases where other individuals were pressured through separate investigations, such as the Song Young-gil and Kim Yong cases.

Through the testimony of former Vice Governor Lee Hwa-young, it was pointed out that political prosecutors began a fierce competition to claim Chairman Lee Jae-myung as a 'trophy'.

There are criticisms that cases that should have been acquitted due to a lack of legal standing, despite attempts to link them to the Ssangbangwool remittance to North Korea, Daejang-dong, and Baekhyeon-dong incidents, were dragged on until the end of 2024.

On Kim Eo-jun's broadcast, Assemblyman Kim Woo-gyeom acknowledged that the allegations against Assemblyman Kim Seung-won were not flawless, but stated that whether he could serve as minister is debatable, considering current societal standards.

DUI and the issue of a child's falsified address are major points of contention, with an analysis suggesting that the public's perception of falsified addresses has changed over time.

Nominee Kim's child's falsified address occurred in 2006 due to issues related to the child's schooling, and there is an opinion that an apology for inappropriate conduct is necessary.

However, as the Yoon Seok-yeol administration also tends to consider falsified addresses comprehensively, there is a growing perception that the era in which this alone leads to disqualification has passed.

Assemblyman Joo Jin-woo of the People Power Party raised suspicions that the Korea Child Development Social Cooperative (established in Yongin, Gyeonggi Province in 2019), operated by Assemblyman Kim Seung-won's family, received preferential treatment by winning government contracts.

However, Nominee Kim's side countered that this organization is part of a social welfare project and not a profit-making enterprise. Parent members even held a press conference at the Gyeonggi Provincial Assembly, demanding an end to political attacks.

The subsidies received by the cooperative, when divided monthly over two years, amounted to a minimum salary of about 2.8 million won per month for Assemblyman Kim Seung-won's wife.

This is a case where parents directly formed the cooperative due to the management difficulties of existing care facilities, and asked Assemblyman Kim Seung-won's spouse for help due to heavy initial operating costs. It has been reinterpreted as a heartwarming story where the spouse and children participated to help children with developmental disabilities.

It was pointed out that an explanation is needed as to whether this was inherited from his grandfather or if it was part of the 'revolving door' legal fees received immediately after opening a law practice, divided under his son's name.

Furthermore, since a room salon was operated in a building inherited from Assemblyman Joo Jin-woo's late father, Assemblyman Kim Seung-won's side counter-attacked, stating that Assemblyman Joo Jin-woo should first provide a clear explanation of his own asset formation process.