Ham Ik-병 Criticizes Suspicions Against Kim Seung-won

Director Ham Ik-byeong pointed out that the MFDS's decision to issue an expedited processing order despite lobbying allegations is a serious problem. He particularly believed that Kim Gang-lip, the then-MFDS chief, might bear legal responsibility for these issues. He emphasized that related reports were mere wordplay and that the matter actually required a thorough investigation.

Director Ham Ik-byeong evaluated this incident as the first significant case since the police assumed full investigative powers. He stated that it is crucial to observe how fairly and transparently the police will conduct the investigation under the current government, which previously criticized prosecutorial powers. He added that if the police could prosecute all involved individuals according to the law, it would be a successful example of investigative independence.

Director Ham Ik-byeong criticized Kim Seung-won's self-disclosure of his conversation log with a lobbyist as an act lacking judgment. Citing the fact that the lobbyist called him 'oppa' (an older male friend) and Kim responded with 'Sujin-ah,' he argued that this itself indicated a failure to recognize the problem.

Director Ham Ik-byeong pointed out that Kim Seung-won's explanation that he meant 'look into it' contradicts his past statements. Kim himself defined 'look into it' as a solicitation during a National Assembly Legislation and Judiciary Committee meeting two years ago, making it difficult for his current explanation to avoid criticism of self-contradiction.

Director Ham Ik-byeong characterized the suspicions related to Kim Seung-won as 'stock market manipulation.' He raised allegations of stock price fluctuations before and after clinical approval and internal information leakage, analyzing that the purpose of the incident was profit realization through stock price boosting rather than new drug development. He mentioned that President Lee Jae-myung had previously spoken about 'stock market manipulation,' suggesting that this matter would also require a thorough investigation.

Director Ham Ik-byeong believed it was uncertain whether Kim Seung-won, while admitting to a personal relationship with Yang Su-jin, was aware of the full extent of the Genexel-related lobbying and the complex profit structure. Citing his initial claim of a chance encounter, then changing his statement days later to admit to the relationship, he suggested it was unlikely the nominee knew all the details of the incident.

Director Ham Ik-byeong assessed that the likelihood of Kim Seung-won being directly involved in this incident for financial gain was low. He cited the relatively small amount received by the broker, Yang Su-jin, compared to the overall scale of the case. He stated that it doesn't feel like the nominee, as a candidate for Minister of Justice, would have directly intervened in the case for money.

Director Ham Ik-byeong questioned the Blue House's claim that Kim Seung-won and Yong Hye-in were 'problem-free candidates who went through a normal personnel vetting system.' He believed that if the Blue House's personnel vetting system, as he understood it, had functioned properly, these candidates would not have passed. He argued that this strongly suggests the possibility that they could not have passed vetting without unofficial intervention.

Director Ham Ik-byeong characterized the Kim Seung-won incident as the beginning of a 'gate' that could determine the direction of the administration. He emphasized that how this incident is managed, along with its inherent risks, will determine the fate of the administration. He added that, similar to how the Sewol ferry incident itself affected the Park Geun-hye government less than its handling, public opinion survey results must be carefully analyzed to understand the public's perspective.

Director Ham Ik-byeong emphasized that the core of the incident is the corruption in clinical approval due to alleged solicitation, rather than Kim Seung-won's personal relationships. He pointed out that Kim Seung-won's solicitation influenced the MFDS regarding COVID-19 new drug clinical trials, leading to clinical approval, after which fraudsters in the KOSDAQ stock market inflicted damage on small individual investors. He mentioned that nearly 30,000 small investors suffered immense losses due to the delisting of Sejong Medical, arguing that public opinion against Kim Seung-won is justifiably higher. He criticized that the allegations related to Kim Seung-won are not merely a scandal but an example demonstrating severe harm to the national system and the public economy.

Director Ham Ik-byeong criticized the current administration's 'double standards' policy, referring to Hong Ji-sun, nominee for Minister of Land, Infrastructure and Transport, and her past of buying an apartment even by borrowing money from her mother-in-law. He believed that the contradictory situation, where the current administration suppresses loans while the nominee acquired real estate through loans, fuels the anger of the 2030 generation. He analyzed that this stems from policy decisions based on inexperienced, theory-driven processes.

Director Ham Ik-byeong stated that if nominee Hong Ji-sun had the experience of asking her mother-in-law for money to buy an apartment, she would be able to understand the difficulties and hardships ordinary people face at banks when trying to acquire an apartment in the Seoul or Gyeonggi areas. He criticized the Democratic Party administration's excessive loan suppression policies, pointing out that politicians are ignoring the housing reality of ordinary citizens.

Director Ham Ik-byeong argued that the decline in the Democratic Party's approval rating was not due to the conflict with the Chief Justice of the Supreme Court but due to real estate tax issues. He expressed a negative view on Kim Eo-jun's 'core supporters' analysis, asserting that the decisive factors causing the public to withdraw support for the administration are economic problems, especially practical burdens like real estate taxes.

Director Ham Ik-byeong believed that laws can change when governments change, thus rendering current legal provisions for personal safety useless. He presented a theory of futility regarding political dismissal of charges and expressed a cynical view on judicial procedures after the end of a term. He ultimately emphasized that legal situations can be fluid when administrations change.

Director Ham Ik-byeong analyzed that the government's initial spending of 25 trillion won, considering the velocity of money circulation, had the effect of distributing over 100 trillion won into the market. He warned that this harbors a serious inflation risk, potentially causing consumer price increases close to 5% of M2. He likened pre-election money-printing to sweet candy, saying that a delayed price, like rising diabetes levels months later, would follow, pointing out that short-term political gains from expansionary fiscal policy could lead to long-term economic problems. He criticized that such policy decisions are made without a deep understanding of the national economy.

Director Ham Ik-byeong criticized right-wing voters for not knowing how to vote and merely acting out 'vengeance,' while left-wing voters are well-trained. He emphasized that for conservatives to regain power, they must stop emotional criticism and claims of 'election fraud' and engage in strategic voting. He argued that discussing 'election fraud' immediately alienates centrist voters, so even if there was fraud, it should not be mentioned strategically. He asserted that for the conservative camp to truly win, securing centrist votes through a unified strategy should be prioritized over emotional responses.