Jeong Chung-rae's Brother-in-Law Confirmed as Shincheonji Member; Lobbying Allegations Over Lee Jae-myung Campaign Approach

NewsTamsa reporter Kang Jin-gu said he verified the fact through reporter Jeong Byeong-gon and also completed cross-checks through other channels. The man served twice as a provincial council member in Gwangmyeong, and another person who served on the council at the same time also confirmed he is a Shincheonji member.

This suggests the campaign's expected trajectory is continuing.

Kwon said that many people around her were visibly swayed by Yu's remarks, suggesting the statement had considerable impact on party members.

Kwon said she had mainly encountered this when reporting on the People Power Party or religious groups, and assessed it as highly unusual that a similar phenomenon has appeared within the Democratic Party.

Kang Jin-gu noted that in such situations one would normally expect an expression of regret or a protest against the election commission's biased management, but the Jeong camp has remained silent. It is presumed this is because the proxy voting has clear evidence and no room for excuse, and opinions have been raised that the camp needs to clearly state whether Rep. Jeong Dal-seong acted alone or under instructions from the camp.

Kim is the older brother of Jeong's spouse Kim In-ok, and served twice as a Gyeonggi provincial council member in Gwangmyeong. Kang Jin-gu stressed that he confirmed Kim Do-sam was the relative of Jeong Chung-rae who visited elder Gu Gyeong-ho during Gu's time in Shincheonji. The Shincheonji allegations involving Jeong's family are thus becoming more concrete.

The council member also recalled Kim as the husband of Rep. Jeong's spouse's older sister.

This means Kim Do-sam is the son of No Hyang-sim, who is Rep. Jeong's mother-in-law, and therefore clearly Rep. Jeong's brother-in-law, that is, the older brother of spouse Kim In-ok.

The former council member said Kim openly told him during their council days that he attended Shincheonji, and actively recruited him as well. This testimony provides concrete evidence that Kim went beyond being a mere member and engaged in active proselytizing, adding credibility to the Shincheonji allegations.

The testimony is presented as direct evidence of Kim Do-sam's Shincheonji ties. Shincheonji's recruitment often takes place through personal relationships, so the fact that Kim directly urged a fellow lawmaker to join carries significant meaning.

Such testimony may fuel calls for Jeong Chung-rae's side to clearly explain any connection between Kim's Shincheonji activities and Jeong himself. In particular, the fact that a politician's family member was deeply involved with a specific religious group may raise debate over public accountability.

Kang Jin-gu acknowledged that Jeong may not have known at the time, but criticized the attitude Jeong has taken in responding to the current allegations. Critics say it is hard to understand that Jeong has made no response to the Shincheonji allegations while stating he would take legal action against those raising them.

Kang Jin-gu identified this as the biggest problem, emphasizing that Jeong has taken a passive stance on the Shincheonji allegations. This is a factor that further amplifies doubts about his relationship with Shincheonji.

Kang Jin-gu asked whether, since the photo on the framed picture was taken with Dr. Kwon's phone, it would still remain on the phone, but Dr. Kwon answered that he was not sure whether he had the photo or deleted it, avoiding clear confirmation.

Reporter Kwon Ji-yeon noted that the OhmyNews article mainly featured Lee Hui-ja's interview under the headline "Lee Hui-ja, a 90-degree bow to Jeong Chung-rae. I don't know why. Linking it to Shincheonji is unjust," but said that overall it carries only Lee Hui-ja's claims, which raises questions for her.

Reporter Kang Jin-gu said that although he managed to connect with Lee Hui-ja and conduct an interview with difficulty, he came away with the impression that she is a person trying to cover up the allegations.

According to reporter Kwon Ji-yeon, it was suggested that the Korea Geunu Association may have enrolled volunteers as members and then processed them as having provided services to government agencies, thereby receiving service fees. An allegation was also raised that part of the service fees was siphoned off in the process.

Lee Hui-ja's activities with the Korea Geunu Association suggest they may have involved more than volunteer work and possibly constituted interest-seeking. Participating in government service projects under the banner of volunteering and receiving payment for it is seen as far removed from the pure volunteer activity of a nonprofit.

If the allegation that part of the service fees was taken is true, it could be a matter carrying legal liability beyond mere ethical issues. It was argued that a thorough investigation is needed into whether she pursued personal gain by exploiting a national event such as the Olympics.

Such circumstances support the possibility that Lee Hui-ja's past conduct aimed at personal benefit or expanding political influence rather than public interest. This is at odds with the "country-woman" image she claims.

Kang pointed out that during Park Geun-hye's presidency, Lee worked as a secretary in the Republican government and maintained close ties with Park's side, and through activities such as the Pro-Park Unification Party exercised political influence. He stressed that she then sent signals to former President Moon Jae-in's side in 2012 and, once Yoon Suk Yeol was elected, suddenly lined up behind Yoon, constantly changing her course in line with shifts of power in politics.

Lee's conduct points to collusion with specific political forces and possible interest-seeking beyond mere political participation. Her attempts to exert influence through ties with particular politicians and parties show the hallmarks of a lobbyist, the argument goes.

In particular, that she was active under administrations across the political spectrum, from the Park government through the Moon and Yoon governments, suggests she approached politics on pragmatic grounds rather than ideological ones. This lends weight to the view that her approach was closer to lobbying for specific ends than to political conviction.

Kang therefore finds Gu Young-sik's assertion that Lee is not a lobbyist unpersuasive when her past and present conduct are considered together. NewsTamsa's position is that a deeper analysis of the background and aims of Lee's activities is needed.

He added that he did not see her after Yoon became president. This suggests Lee was involved in Yoon Suk Yeol's election campaign and entered into a cooperative relationship with Yeongtong Master.

He said he regrets that Yoon became president but the results have not been good, and pointed out that small and medium-sized businesses are in tremendous difficulty and that regulations are numerous and not being lifted.

Yeongtong Master said that Lee Jae-myung should not become president, and argued that Kim Moon-soo should have been the candidate. He also said there are many greedy leftists among those who are pushing for change, and asserted that the current voting system is flawed and 100 percent fraudulent.

This shows that a person who once supported and helped President Yoon now criticizes the government's policies and even questions the legitimacy of the election itself. His remarks are notable for expressing dissatisfaction with the current political situation alongside extreme claims.

This appears to be an attempt to downplay her political influence or past career.

Reporter Kwon Ji-yeon said that Chairwoman Lee highlighted her own influence, saying that anyone in politics in Mapo would surely know her. This shows a two-faced attitude: rejecting the direct label of lobbyist while showing off her presence and power within political circles.

He strongly criticized the idea that Jeong could not have known Lee was essentially a figure close to Shincheonji and heterodox groups, saying that if he did not know, he should not be in politics. Kang judged that Jeong very likely tried to curry favor with Lee because of her political influence.

Kang pointed out that Jeong, who claims he will strengthen the identity of the Democratic Party, behaved in a completely different way from his words. This reveals a gap between the values Jeong professes and his actual conduct, raising questions about his political sincerity.

In particular, the claim that he sought to borrow political influence from a person linked to Shincheonji raises a serious problem about Jeong's morality and sense of responsibility. Allegations of ties with a religious group under controversy can be fatal for a politician.

Kang's argument strongly raises the suspicion that Jeong, knowing Lee's background and influence, ignored them for his own political standing and tried to maintain the relationship, and demands a clear explanation from Jeong's side.

She rebutted CBS's report that she and President Yoon had a one-on-one meeting, saying that about 10 to 11 people were present. This is a direct rebuttal by Lee to press coverage and shows there is controversy over the nature of the meeting.

Such remarks show Lee's strong dissatisfaction with how the press reported and her intent to correct misunderstandings about her. She sharply criticized, saying "Who lied? CBS lied first," making her position clear.

Her explanation is read as an attempt to stress that the meeting with President Yoon was not a personal private audience but a public gathering with several people, and to downplay the meaning and impact of the encounter.

Lee explained that the meeting came about by chance when she went out to buy raw beef for her grandson and was introduced by Rep. Tae Yong-ho, but reporter Kang Jin-gu rebutted that such coincidence could not happen.

Kang said one cannot accidentally walk into a place guarded by bodyguards, and that even if it was not a private meeting, it was a place only selected people could enter. He raised doubts about what kind of person Lee was to be allowed into such a place, supporting the claim that it was an approach with a specific purpose rather than a mere coincidence.

This suggests the view that Lee's meeting with President Yoon was not a lucky opportunity as she claims, but more likely a lobbying effort aimed at representing Shincheonji's interests or exercising political influence. NewsTamsa raised further suspicions about the background and process of the meeting and called for the truth to be established.

Reporter Kang also expressed doubt about Lee's credibility, noting that although she denies being a lobbyist, she actually had close contact with key figures in politics and tried to exert influence. He therefore takes the position that the meeting was an intentional approach rather than a coincidence.

Reporter Kwon Ji-yeon pointed out that the photo with Yoon was made public in 2025, while the photo with Lee Jae-myung, then party leader, was taken in 2024, so Lee's explanation does not add up. This raised doubts that Lee does not tell the whole truth.

She said she could not know because she never sent a document anywhere. This can be interpreted as an attempt to avoid giving a clear answer to a question about her direct connection with Shincheonji.

She repeatedly said they should not keep calling, and responded as if it was Chairwoman Lee who called first, so she called back. This appears to show displeasure with the reporting and an attempt to block further questions.