NEC Parliamentary Investigation: Contrary to reports that 'fraudulent election theory' divided the opposition, only Chairman Yoon Sang-hyun is making inconsistent remarks

Criticism has been raised regarding the Seoul National Election Commission's decision to dismiss an appeal concerning the Seoul mayoral election. It is pointed out that making such a decision even while undergoing a parliamentary investigation indicates that the NEC still does not recognize the seriousness of the problem.

This is increasing distrust in the NEC's attitude and raising questions about the effectiveness of the parliamentary investigation. Such behavior by the NEC could further fuel public dissatisfaction.

Suspicions of external pressure were raised when it was reported that the Central National Election Commission sent an 'pressure-laden' report to the Seoul National Election Commission. This report reportedly defended the NEC itself, stating 'there are no problems.' Due to this report, an unprecedented situation occurred where three Seoul NEC members resigned simultaneously.

This raises suspicions that the Central NEC tried to unduly intervene in the independent judgment of the local NEC. The mass resignation of NEC members suggests that this pressure was considerable, raising serious concerns about the fairness and independence of election management.

Some media outlets reported that the parliamentary investigation special committee was divided over the fraudulent election theory, but this was refuted as false. It was explained that in reality, only Chairman Yoon Sang-hyun was making different claims alone.

In other words, the situation was not caused by a division of opinion within the entire opposition party, but by the independent actions of a specific individual, Chairman Yoon Sang-hyun. This interpretation shows that media reports can sometimes distort the essence of the matter.

It was claimed that Chairman Yoon Sang-hyun's statement, "The claim that voter turnout was manipulated is incitement," is factually incorrect. Chairman Yoon's statement was a subtly twisted interpretation, and no one ever said, "If voter turnout is manipulated, then voter turnout is automatically manipulated," it was refuted.

It is pointed out that voter turnout manipulation and vote share manipulation are not logically automatically linked, and Chairman Yoon's statement itself is close to incitement. This leads to criticism that it blurs the core issues of the parliamentary investigation and causes unnecessary controversy.

Joo Jin-woo's Issue Analysis believes that Chairman Yoon Sang-hyun's statement distorts the essence of the actual suspicions raised, and worries that this could obscure the focus of the parliamentary investigation.

Criticism has been raised about the inefficient operation of the parliamentary investigation special committee. The meeting started at 10 AM, but the first questioning did not take place until almost 6 PM, indicating a breakdown. This was attributed to excessive focus on the 'recount' issue and the chairman's inexperienced operation.

In particular, the lack of experience in the Legislative and Judiciary Committee of Chairman Yoon Sang-hyun of the People Power Party and his inadequate control over speaking rights were pointed out as problems. The special committee chairman is a position rotated between the ruling and opposition parties, so despite this being the People Power Party's turn and an important opportunity, the chairman was criticized for not respecting the party's stance and acting unpredictably.

It was claimed that the Democratic Party tried to derail a hearing even when witnesses were present. It was even asserted that despite key witnesses like Wi Cheol-hwan and Noh Tae-hak being seated, they demanded to do nothing and send them back. This was criticized as the National Assembly's abuse of power and that a public hearing should be conducted properly.

It is suspected that the Democratic Party wants to hold the hearing again later because they intend to link this hearing with the recount at Olympic Park. In other words, they are trying to negotiate, saying, 'If you give us a recount, we'll give you a hearing.'

These claims suggest the possibility of the parliamentary investigation being used for political bargaining rather than its pure purpose. Not proceeding with a hearing even after summoning witnesses can lead to criticism of the National Assembly's inherent role and responsibilities.

A real case was revealed where one ballot box in Guro-gu went missing during the last local election. It was pointed out that it was absurd for a ballot box to disappear from a polling station, and even more so that the counting proceeded with the remaining ballot boxes and winners were announced without finding it. This was highlighted as a serious incident where the voting rights of 500 voters were ignored.

Even more astonishing is that the NEC concealed the fact of the missing ballot box, neither reporting it to the police nor publicizing it to the media. It was criticized that despite being a matter for which the NEC Secretary-General should have apologized and promised system improvements, it was glossed over as if nothing had happened. Even when the ballot box was accidentally found during cleaning three days later, it was revealed that its results were not reflected in the final vote count, despite being within the period for modifying counting results.

This incident strongly raises suspicions of dereliction of duty and concealment by the NEC, and fundamental questions about the transparency and fairness of election management. The loss of a ballot box and the non-reflection of its results can be considered a grave matter that undermines the basic principles of democracy.

A strong argument was made that the NEC's failure to take timely action, despite its duty to manage elections, constitutes dereliction of duty, election fraud, and a punishable offense. In particular, suspicions about a voter turnout manipulation system were raised through examples of vote count input errors in local elections. It was found that there were 11 cases where the handwritten count summary sheets at the counting stations differed from the electronically entered data.

Regarding this, the NEC Secretary-General was pressed with the question, "Can you confidently say that no further errors will occur?" but no clear answer was received. This is interpreted as implying that the NEC either lacks confidence in its own system or that there may be hidden problems.

It was revealed through a tip-off that some of the early voting ballot boxes, specifically 'translucent early voting ballot boxes,' were manufactured in China. This raises new suspicions regarding the origin and transparency of the ballot boxes.

The country of manufacture and material of ballot boxes can be directly related to the fairness of elections, and the revelation of this fact through a tip-off once again points to the lack of transparency of the NEC.

After experiencing the parliamentary audit of the NEC, it was stated that there was a conviction that the NEC was "corrupt beyond imagination." Therefore, if a special prosecutor's investigation is launched, a flood of corruption will emerge, and it was emphasized that if such problems could be found without compulsory investigative powers, the truth would be clearly revealed if a large number of personnel were deployed.

This assertion expresses strong suspicion that corruption within the NEC has reached a serious level and is presented as grounds for emphasizing the necessity of introducing a special prosecutor. The stance is that all corruption suspicions against the NEC must be thoroughly investigated through intensive scrutiny.

It reveals deep-seated distrust in the NEC and an perception that the current parliamentary investigation alone cannot solve the problem. Therefore, it urges a strong investigation through a special prosecutor.

Suspicions have been raised that NEC staff are passive in domestic election management but active in overseas assignments. They are dispatched overseas under the pretext of managing overseas voting, with 22 people receiving 3.14 billion won, or 150 million won per person, for the general election, and they were reportedly overseas for a year prior, essentially 'loafing around.'

This points out the inefficient use of taxpayer money and raises questions about the purpose and effectiveness of overseas assignments. In particular, there is a demand for transparent disclosure of what specific duties overseas dispatched staff perform locally.

Along with criticism that overseas dispatch costs and durations are excessive, there are even suspicions that they may have stayed overseas for purposes other than actual election management. These suspicions could expand into issues of the NEC's lax operation and budget waste.

The argument for a thorough audit and investigation of the NEC's overseas dispatch personnel management is gaining traction. The stance is that verification of whether taxpayers' money is being used properly is urgent.

It was revealed that the NEC's overseas business trip reports were completely missing. A viewer asked if 'the period without business trip reports could be considered embezzlement of public funds,' to which the answer was "I think it's possible." In fact, the reports were either missing or all the reports that had been temporarily received were gone.

This is a serious issue that could even lead to suspicions of embezzlement of public funds, and it is a clear example of the NEC's poor data management and lack of transparency. The disappearance of key documents that could verify whether overseas business trips were properly conducted and whether public funds were legitimately used strongly suggests the need for audits and investigations.

Strong criticism was raised against the argument that it is better for both creditors and debtors to settle debts that cannot be repaid. The argument that creditors also bear responsibility for lending excessively, even though the debtor is responsible for not repaying the debt, was met with a bewildered response, stating, "I don't think even a leftist ideology book would contain such a statement."

The creditor responsibility theory is the logic that the person who lent the money is responsible, which was refuted by saying, "If they hadn't lent it, there would have been no reason not to repay it, but they lent it for no reason." Questioning whether such an argument helps or harms common people, a critical stance was clearly taken against the argument that seems to shift the responsibility of the debtor.

While debt issues involve complex factors, the notion that the fundamental responsibility for default lies with the creditor is seen as going against common sense. This could lead to controversy over sound economic principles and a sense of responsibility.

It was revealed that a close associate of Lee Jae-myung, the Chun추gwanjang of the Blue House, bought a villa, owned multiple homes, received monthly rent, and even carried out illegal extensions. Although he explained that he "bought it with extensions already built," it was pointed out that the architectural ledger showed this to be untrue. This matter was initially announced as a resignation due to a personal issue, but when an SBS report broke, the stance suddenly changed to disciplinary action and dismissal.

This was criticized as a "dismissal show" by the Democratic Party, which hurriedly took dismissal measures due to concerns about a decline in approval ratings. The initial attempts to conceal or downplay illegal and immoral acts, only to reverse their stance due to media reports, was pointed out as further eroding public trust.

Allegations of abuse of power by Supreme Council member Lee Sung-yoon's aides were reported by New 탐사. It was stated that New 탐사 is a representative pro-Lee Jae-myung Youtuber, so its objectivity needs verification. According to the report, over 30 aides left Supreme Council member Lee Sung-yoon's office in two years, and there were allegations of abuse.

Specific examples of abuse included throwing a mobile phone at an aide's face for giving them nomination rights, and demanding pet names from unmarried aides. It was noted that having a different pet name for each unmarried aide was unusual, and these pet names are not being disclosed as it could reveal the informant. It was criticized that if these allegations are true, it is almost at the level of a mental illness.

Confusion arose within the party regarding Rep. Han Dong-hoon's attendance at an event for Busan lawmakers. The city party chairman received a notice to move Busan public institutions, and explained that it was a party event, so only party members were supposed to attend. However, in the Busan lawmakers' group chat, some media reports led to protests, asking, "Why was independent Rep. Han Dong-hoon invited to our party event?"

Criticism was raised against Rep. Lee Sung-won for proceeding with an event including Rep. Han Dong-hoon without consulting other lawmakers, simply because he was the city party chairman. This was interpreted as a kind of "trick," and it was pointed out that lawmakers were unaware and forced to attend. It was particularly criticized that proceeding unilaterally without consultation, despite clear opposition being expressed multiple times, "rather created resentment."

It was also added that many lawmakers must have been dissatisfied with this way of proceeding. Pushing ahead with events unilaterally, disregarding the opinions of lawmakers, is an example of a lack of communication within the party and a lack of democratic procedures, and is pointed out as a factor that could exacerbate internal party conflicts in the long term.

A strong will was expressed to represent the will of the people by utilizing the position as a member of the National Assembly and to change the tide in important future trials. In particular, it was emphasized that there is nothing to fear as the people who trusted him and gave him the National Assembly badge are behind him.

Those concerned about Mayor Choo Kyung-ho's trial were urged to "not worry," and it was confidently stated that unlike when he was merely a prosecutor, now as a member of the National Assembly, his testimony could completely change the tide of the trial. This reveals an intention to not only testify but also to exercise influence as a National Assembly member to clarify the essence of the case.

These remarks are interpreted as a strong belief in the realization of judicial justice, along with a予告 of active action utilizing political status. In particular, mentioning "I can talk for a very long time once I start" suggests readiness to provide important testimony in court.

In conclusion, it was declared that based on the authority as a member of the National Assembly and the support of the people, he would actively work to uncover the truth in various matters, including Mayor Choo Kyung-ho's trial. This is considered a statement that could have a significant impact on future political actions and judicial processes.