Controversy over the political motives of the prosecution's investigation is growing after it was revealed that opposition lawmakers' names were searched as specific keywords during the investigation process.
Lawmaker Kim Seung-won has shifted from a defensive to an offensive stance. He stated that if he becomes Minister of Justice, he would consider dissolving the People Power Party and mentioned the necessity of revoking certain indictments. These remarks demonstrate his resolve to directly confront the allegations, aligning with the party leader's current stance.
The opposing side accused Newstamsa of causing team leader Jang to make an extreme choice due to its reporting. Newstamsa stated that it tried to contact the bereaved family to verify facts, but Park Gu-ryang's associates physically blocked them.
The lawsuit is scheduled to be filed tomorrow.
Candidate Kim Seung-won is minimizing media exposure and preparing for his confirmation hearing. He stated that he will thoroughly explain all raised suspicions to the public and that all details can be clarified. He intends to be judged by the public based on the facts.
It has been confirmed that candidate Kim Seung-won's child had a fictitious residency. In this regard, an analysis suggested that fictitious residency, unlike in the past, is not a decisive reason for a minister's dismissal. However, there are also opinions that an apology for inappropriate conduct is necessary.
In particular, questions were raised about the operational status, including Kim Seung-won's son receiving a salary. However, cooperative members countered that it was a heartwarming case initiated at the request of parents, and lawmaker Ju Jin-woo's claims were political attacks.
The source of these funds is unclear, and lawmaker Ju Jin-woo is suspected of receiving preferential treatment after opening his law practice. Additionally, controversy has arisen over a room salon operating in a building inherited from his late father.
I don't know if it happened after he quit being a lawyer, but his minor son suddenly got 700 million won. He doesn't say who gave that minor son the money or how he got it.
This strongly supports the suspicion that the prosecution conducted a planned investigation targeting specific politicians.
Han Dong-hoon's side claimed that Kim Seung-won responded to specific company solicitations, but a review of the original transcript shows Kim Seung-won reacted passively to general remarks about lobbying practices at the Ministry of Food and Drug Safety. Criticism arose that Kim Seung-won's remarks were conveyed differently from his actual intention due to editing out of context. The original transcript confirms that Kim Seung-won did not explicitly consent or act actively on the broker's request. Newstamsa believes this issue is not a simple misunderstanding but closer to intentional distortion.
Broker Yang Su-jin mentioned that People Power Party connections 'get things done very quickly,' implying ease of access. Suspicions also arose regarding her involvement with Gu Soon-seong, a former bodyguard for President Park Geun-hye, in relation to lobbying the Public Procurement Service. This shows that lobbying activities and methods changed with the shift in power.
These circumstances suggest brokers have deep connections within the political sphere.
It was revealed that an investigative report existed at the beginning of the Genencell case investigation, analyzing lawmaker Kim Seung-won's connections. This report is suspected of emphasizing connections with leader Lee Jae-myung and focusing the investigation on Kim Seung-won. It is criticized as an abnormal investigative case, including attaching media reports to the investigation report, and is accused of being politically motivated.
During the Genencell case investigation, suspicions arose that the Chief Prosecutor of the Suwon District Prosecutors' Office was replaced, and an investigation team targeting leader Lee Jae-myung was assigned. Furthermore, the case being reassigned to the Seoul Western District Prosecutors' Office Criminal Division 5 suggests the possibility that then-Minister of Justice Han Dong-hoon directed the investigation through personnel appointments. It is argued that former Minister Han Dong-hoon could not have been unaware of this case.
This raises questions about the fairness of the investigation and draws criticism for political bias. Yang Su-jin's statement reveals her perception that the intensity of the investigation against her is due to her association with a specific political party. She felt she was undergoing a lengthy and intense investigation because she had asked a Democratic Party-affiliated lawmaker. This suggests the possibility of political considerations in the prosecution's investigation and is cited as a clear example of the unfairness felt by the suspect. Her claim is based on the belief that she would not have been investigated for such a long period if she had attempted to lobby a People Power Party lawmaker. These remarks amplify doubts about the political neutrality of the prosecution's investigation.
It is difficult for the prosecution to avoid criticism that it targeted a specific National Assembly member.
The indictment plan is known to be a document not attached to trial materials, thus inaccessible to journalists. Han Dong-hoon's side claims they did not receive it directly from the prosecution, but possibilities of obtaining it through prosecutorial connections or leaking it himself during his time as Minister of Justice are raised. This leads to criticism of potential internal prosecutorial document leaks and Han Dong-hoon's insufficient explanation.
Both resigned and moved to Kim & Chang as lawyers; notably, Prosecutor Kim Jong-wook previously ruled a suspended indictment in the Kim Seung-won case. The possibility of the indictment plan being leaked upon their retirement is also raised, intensifying fairness controversies.
Yang Su-jin countered that her establishment was a bar-style general restaurant, arguing that Han Dong-hoon's unsubstantiated designation of it as a 'room salon' was a significant issue in light of the 'Julie Incident.' This controversy is further spreading through comparison with the Julie Incident indictment.
It is pointed out that some media outlets and celebrities classified as 'Team Kim Eo-jun,' including the Cho Kuk Innovation Party, are responding passively to this issue. This amplifies doubts about the lack of a clear front within the progressive camp, such as interpreting a full-blown confrontation with former Minister Han Dong-hoon as an opportunity to strengthen the Kim Min-seok party leader's system.
The intention is to monitor evidence destruction, such as former Minister Han Dong-hoon's re-registration for Telegram, and uncover the truth. Kim Seung-won's confirmation hearing is scheduled to be broadcast live tomorrow at 2 PM, and it is expected to reveal the full story of the case. This hearing is anticipated to be an important venue for exposing the reality of the Han Dong-hoon Gate.
Answers come from the transcript, with the exact spot cited.
Want the next article from 뉴탐사 NewTamsa?
When 뉴탐사 NewTamsa publishes, we'll write it up like the one you just read and email it to you.
뉴탐사 NewTamsa published 69 in the last 7 days.
