Amidst the emphasis on judicial independence, an analysis suggests that the decline in Chairman Lee Jae-myung's approval rating could act as a variable in the trial's progress.
The court ruled that the disclosed facts lacked confidentiality and thus had no secret value. This case is being cited as an example of an excessive indictment by the special prosecutor for sedition, and its repercussions are drawing attention.
In other cases, there are actually four guilty verdicts pending. In particular, for the case of leaking a list of intelligence agency agents, he was sentenced to two years in prison, and there is still room for legal dispute in the appellate trial regarding this matter.
It has been argued that cases of excessive indictment could later be subject to charges of judicial distortion. There is a growing concern that politically motivated indictments, such as the former Minister Lee Jong-sup's departure to Australia, are on the rise. The stance is that such excessive indictments should be rectified once the government changes and the failures of the Democratic Party and Lee Jae-myung's administration come to light.
This is interpreted as an indirect rejection of the Blue House's request for re-nomination of a Supreme Court justice. The Chief Justice underscored adherence to principles, showing his resolve to guard against political intervention.
Recent New Daily public opinion poll results show Chairman Lee Jae-myung's approval rating has fallen to 33.1%. Analysis suggests that, given the current atmosphere, there's a high probability of his approval rating dropping into the 20s next week. This decline in approval rating is expected to be a significant variable in future political developments.
The decline in approval rating not only significantly impacts Chairman Lee Jae-myung's political standing but also suggests it could be a decisive turning point in the judiciary's trial proceedings.
The Democratic Party's intention is interpreted as an attempt to destroy evidence by crippling investigative agencies. The question of what these actions are for is growing.
Suspicions have been raised that Representative Kim Seung-won hired the son of a judge who rejected an arrest warrant as an intern in his office. To trace these suspicions and uncover the truth, past prosecutorial investigation records are essential. This is because such processes can only be verified if the contents investigated by prosecutors in the past have been meticulously accumulated.
This contradicts Minister Kim's previous explanation that there was a hiring announcement. It has been revealed that Minister Kim has repeatedly given explanations that differ from the facts regarding his friendship and meetings with the judge.
Candidate Kim Seung-won is suspected of purchasing stocks using undisclosed information obtained through a broker named Yang. It is reported that inappropriate conduct, such as responding to relevant information even during parliamentary audits, continued. These suspicions were raised based on materials tracked and investigated by Assemblyman Ahn Cheol-soo.
Despite a majority in public opinion polls pointing out personnel issues, the Democratic Party and the government appear determined to maintain the current direction of state administration.
The prosecution cited insufficient substantiation of charges and inadequate proof of flight or evidence destruction risk as reasons for rejection. Consequently, the police's investigative capacity and their conduct of investigations, seemingly sensitive to the government, have come under scrutiny.
This is recognized as a significant issue that raises the risk of undermining 'procedural legitimacy,' which is central to judicial procedures.
This response could also be used to highlight deficiencies in the police investigation.
Actually, if I were in Representative Kim Byeong-gi's position, I would argue, 'Why are you suddenly trying to arrest me now? I've already been investigated, and you've taken all my documents. Isn't it that you can't arrest me due to a lack of evidence? Shouldn't you not request a warrant?'
In contrast, the prosecution's credibility recorded 47.5%, a much higher figure than the police. These results show that the public trusts the prosecution more than the police.
This move to amend the law is considered a significant matter that will bring about not only a re-establishment of the relationship between the prosecution and police but also changes to the overall criminal justice system.
Answers come from the transcript, with the exact spot cited.
Want the next one from this channel too?
When 펜앤마이크TV publishes, we'll write it up like the one you just read and email it to you.
{channel} published 92 in the last 7 days.
We skip Shorts. You can unfollow any time.
