Kim Seung-won's Appointment as Justice Minister Imminent

This video was commissioned by PenNMike by several media companies, including JoongAng Ilbo, for use in their reports.

This is an example of PenNMike's growing influence, analyzed as a result of increased attention following its surpassing 2 million subscribers. Media outlets actively utilized the video, featuring it prominently in their headline articles.

The official claimed that special favors were given during the fire inspection rejection and re-evaluation process.

Questions are being raised about the process in which an existing operating agency was disqualified from the project and a new company was selected. An interview with a victim, secured by Representative Joo Jin-woo's office, was presented as evidence supporting these allegations.

In a survey conducted by the Korea Social Opinion Institute (KSOI) on September 14 and 15, support was 25.1%, and opposition was 52.1%.

This clearly shows that the public has a negative perception of Kim Seung-won's appointment as minister.

After the report is adopted, it will be forwarded to the Blue House for the President's appointment procedure.

September 18 coincides with Chairman Lee Jae-myung's public address schedule, which could highlight its political significance. It is highly anticipated that President Lee Jae-myung will appoint Kim Seung-won.

The subcommittee consists of 6 members from the People Power Party and 3 from the Democratic Party and pan-opposition parties.

Disagreement arose over whether to recognize video recordings as evidence to protect sexual assault victims. Representative Kim Nam-hee (Democratic Party) prioritized protection, while Representative Kim Yong-min (Democratic Party) insisted on a prosecutorial reform perspective. Cooperation with the Democratic Party faltered when Representative Park Eun-jung of the Jo Guk Innovation Party opposed the CIO's request for security investigations.

Representative Kim Nam-hee stated her position to use video recordings as evidence to protect sexual assault victims.

However, hardline lawmakers such as Representative Kim Yong-min opposed the bill, which would not recognize recorded interviews by prosecutors as evidence, and forced a vote, leading to a situation where Representative Kim Nam-hee's remarks were restricted.

Representative Park Eun-jung took a strong stance against direct involvement by prosecutors.

Both parties attempted to compromise by changing the term 'demand' to 'request', but Representative Park opposed the entire quasi-application provision, failing to reach an agreement.

Representative Kim Tae-gyu stated the policy goal that when they take power and become the majority party, all the tattered bills must be changed.

To this end, the policy committee chairman is leading the work of streamlining the relevant list, and a major legislative revision is expected when there is a change of government in the future.

He clarified that all such expressions originated from the Democratic Party.

Representative Kim argued that it is more effective to laugh off the opponent's vulgar expressions rather than respond to each one, showing a difference in class.

It was revealed that the nominee's wife earns 5 million won per month and his son 3.5 million won per month, totaling about 8 million won from operating the organization.

This points out the problem of taking private gain under the guise of 'service' and unqualified individuals engaging in activities. Criticism also arose that it is being exploited as a means of livelihood under the pretext of helping children.

Representative Kim Tae-gyu raised suspicions that the nominee's side distributed answer sheets to Democratic Party lawmakers the day before the hearing.

This, coupled with the fact that the submission rate for personnel hearing documents was only about 65%, led to criticism that the tearful act at the hearing was also a planned scenario.

Justice Minister nominee Kim Seung-won's tears during the personnel hearing were criticized as inappropriate self-pity for a high-ranking public official. Representative Kim Tae-gyu pointed out that for someone of the caliber of a former prosecutor, two-term lawmaker, and Justice Minister nominee, shedding tears over such matters is disconnected from public sentiment.

The attitude of being engrossed only in one's own emotions while failing to understand the public's heartbreak can be seen as a lack of empathy. Such behavior is enough to raise suspicion that he is attempting to use the Justice Minister position for political purposes, such as defending Chairman Lee Jae-myung.

The sentencing standard for influence peddling is 8 months to 1 year, and prosecutors typically recommend twice the desired sentence, it was revealed.

This was presented during the criticism of allegations related to Justice Minister nominee Kim Seung-won, suggesting that if Kim Seung-won is found guilty of influence peddling, a minimum sentence of 8 months is expected.

It was pointed out that the cat-ear headband worn in the publicly released photo could be perceived as an inappropriate relationship.

It was argued that under civil law, infidelity includes not only sexual relations but also any circumstances that could undermine the trustworthiness of the marriage, and if the two were an economic community, the entire sum received by Yang Soo-jin would be money received by Kim Seung-won.

Based on this, applying the sentencing standards, a severe sentence of 9 to 12 years for bribery could be possible, it was said. This issue is directly related to Kim Seung-won's morality and legal responsibility, and controversy is expected.

This includes allegations of improper solicitations, stock manipulation, drunk driving, tax delinquency, and false registration of residence.

Problems with his spouse's operation of an association and his son's unqualified employment were also pointed out. Especially, issues concerning drug administration in clinical trials involving 93 subjects were raised, casting strong doubts on his suitability as a nominee.

He directly inquired with the person in question and received a response that no such statement was made.

Representative Kim Tae-gyu added that he was informed of the intention to respond according to law and principle in the future. This suggests the possibility of false information being spread within the opposition party.

In a survey by the Korea Social Opinion Institute (KSOI), the public opinion poll results related to nominee Kim Seung-won showed that opposition was more than double the support.

It is noteworthy that despite KSOI's tendency to produce favorable poll results for Chairman Lee Jae-myung, his approval rating remains in the mid-30s. This trend becomes even clearer when comparing figures from various polling agencies.

This is a criticism that personnel appointments are made based on the President's defense against judicial risks and unconditional obedience.

In particular, it is analyzed that selections are made centered on 'individuals picked by Kim Hyun-ji,' and people who will mechanically move to dismiss indictments are needed. This personnel policy is evaluated as closely linked to the current administration's policy direction.

The panelists analyzed that the press conference aimed to shift issues rather than engage in substantial communication.

It was pointed out that the main reason for the decline in approval ratings is public distrust, labeling the President as a 'shepherd boy president.' Criticism was also raised that references to public welfare in the press conference would remain abstract and declarative.

Jeong Kyung-wook questioned whether nominee Kang was truly a respected general from the Korea Military Academy, criticizing that it was difficult to find any conviction or philosophy regarding the military.

Concerns were raised that his stance would align with Lee Jae-myung's personnel policy. In particular, it was pointed out that he failed to properly play the 'red team' role of offering sharp criticism on security realities and the combined defense system.

This suggests that the nominee may be perceived as a person who fits the President's personnel principle, i.e., an individual with many weaknesses and no convictions. The nominee's attitude and lack of conviction for an important military position could lead to security concerns.