Prosecutor Park Sang-yong Strongly Criticizes Special Counsel's Claim of 'Super-sized State Affairs Manipulation' as 'Slander Without Investigative Power'

He explained that the Special Counsel's investigative authority only arises if the involvement of President Yoon Suk-yeol and First Lady Kim Keon-hee is proven, and pointed out that the Special Counsel is deceiving the public by defining this matter as 'super-sized state affairs manipulation' and acting as if they have investigative power. He raised the possibility that the Special Counsel is deliberately manipulating public opinion to secure data from the Seoul High Prosecutors' Office.

Prosecutor Park Sang-yong criticized the Special Counsel for acting like a 'commando unit' completely subservient to power. He argued that despite the Special Counsel being an institution that should be independent of political influence, the Kwon Chang-won Special Counsel team conducted investigations that aligned with the intentions of the Democratic Party's special committee for parliamentary investigation, thus being compliant with power. He emphasized that such conduct undermines the original purpose of the Special Counsel.

He pointed out that Special Prosecutor Kim Jin-min's interim investigation report contained false information, and that the Special Counsel's attempt to secure records without any investigative power was an abuse of authority from the outset. He emphasized that as he investigated the case himself, he knows best whether there was any involvement, and that the claims of Presidential Office involvement are mere rumors.

He stated that despite a travel ban being a serious measure comparable to detention, the Special Counsel extended it without ever questioning them. He added that indiscriminate travel bans on individuals with no risk of fleeing overseas raise concerns about human rights violations and could even lead to suspicions of election interference ahead of the general election.

Prosecutor Park Sang-yong pointed out that despite the Special Counsel claiming presidential involvement in the Ssangbangwool case, they never once summoned him, the actual target of the investigation. He stated that even though the Special Counsel claimed to have confirmed circumstances of presidential directives or reports, they never directly asked him about the relevant details. He criticized this as demonstrating the Special Counsel's shoddy investigative practices, where they raise suspicions without even basic fact-checking procedures.

He added that such articles would pour out today and tomorrow.

He pointed out that the Special Counsel fabricated these allegations themselves, explaining that at the time of the North Korea remittance case, there was only much talk, such as National Intelligence Service involvement rumors, but no actual evidence of involvement. He stated that the Special Counsel is deliberately creating non-existent allegations.

Prosecutor Park Sang-yong pointed out that the Special Counsel's act of receiving records from the Seoul High Prosecutors' Office Human Rights Infringement Review TF itself was problematic. He argued that investigative power must be clear to receive records, and it is improper to receive records without such power. He emphasized that this is no different from handing over secret records to a private citizen.

He added that this reveals Special Prosecutor Kim Jin-min's claim of investigative power to be false.

He argued that the Seoul High Prosecutors' Office's act of handing over records to the Special Counsel could constitute disclosure of official secrets. He questioned the reliability of this institution, recalling the precedent where the Supreme Prosecutors' Office Inspection Committee concluded that there was no salmon liquor party.

He pointed out that while the Special Counsel claimed presidential reporting and involvement in the investigation, they actually had no basis to investigate. He criticized Special Prosecutor Kim Jin-min's broadcast statements as being based on unconfirmed false information.

He explained that criminal charges and investigative power only arise when President Yoon Suk-yeol and First Lady Kim Keon-hee received reports and 'abused their legitimate procedural authority'. He emphasized that merely receiving a report does not grant investigative power, criticizing the Special Counsel's claims as not meeting legal requirements.

He criticized the Special Counsel's claim that the investigation was halted due to the court as a distortion of facts. He explained that since there were no leads to investigate in the first place, they could not secure the records themselves.

He criticized that to fabricate an investigation, one must examine fabricated records, but the Special Counsel concluded their investigation without even seeing those records. He emphasized that this shows the Special Counsel's investigative progress was virtually non-existent.

Prosecutor Park Sang-yong stated that the Special Counsel's mention of the possibility of numerous dismissals of prosecution in the charges means they themselves admitted to lacking investigative power. He characterized the Special Counsel's outcome report as a clear statement confessing their lack of investigative power and abuse of authority. He emphasized that by mentioning the possibility of dismissals of prosecution themselves, the Special Counsel demonstrated a clear awareness of the limitations of their investigative authority.

Prosecutor Park Sang-yong argued that the allegation of the Yoon Suk-yeol Presidential Office's involvement in the North Korea remittance case was a 'rumor' initially created by the Special Counsel. He suggested that even the complaints and accusations might have been initiated by the Special Counsel, criticizing them for fabricating the allegations themselves and then inflating them into 'super-sized state affairs manipulation'. He added that in this process, the Special Counsel attempted to disguise their allegations as media reports to shift blame.