Assemblyman Kim Tae-kyu Retaliates Against Assemblyman Kim Min-seok in Chief Justice Addressing Controversy

The Democratic Party raised an issue with Assemblyman Kim Tae-kyu addressing Chief Justice Cho Hee-dae as 'Mr. Cho Hee-dae.' In response, Assemblyman Kim Tae-kyu called Assemblyman Kim Min-seok 'Mr. Kim Min-seok,' criticizing the Democratic Party's double standards. Current affairs critic Park Sang-kyu pointed out, "Is it unacceptable for Kim Tae-kyu to call him 'Mr. Cho Hee-dae,' but acceptable to call Kim Min-seok 'Mr. Kim Min-seok'?" criticizing the Democratic Party's inconsistent stance on the matter of addressing individuals.

The Democratic Party opposed Chief Justice Cho Hee-dae's recommendation of Senior Judge Son Bong-gi as a Supreme Court Justice candidate, demanding Chief Justice Cho Hee-dae's immediate resignation. The Democratic Party argued that this recommendation undermines judicial independence and is an attempt to appoint an individual with specific leanings. Current affairs critic Park Sang-kyu viewed the Democratic Party as politically attacking the Chief Justice under the pretext of Senior Judge Son Bong-gi's recommendation. He strongly criticized the Democratic Party's claim, quoting, "He must immediately resign from the position of Chief Justice. Resignation is the only way to atone for the collapsed judicial justice and before the public."

Current affairs critic Park Sang-kyu strongly criticized Assemblyman Park Sung-joon's description of Chief Justice Cho Hee-dae as 'Chief Justice of the Century.' He emphasized that the word '세기 (segi, century)' is predominantly used in a negative context, referencing a past instance where former Blue House administrative official Choi Hyuk-jin sarcastically called Chief Justice Cho Hee-dae 'Toyotomi Hideyoshi.' The critic pointed out, "He said 'Chief Justice of the Century.' That's a bad meaning. What follows 'century'? 'Crime of the century.' 'Murderer of the century,'" highlighting that this epithet is mainly attached to criminals or murderers. He argued that using such an expression for the Chief Justice is inappropriate.

The Democratic Party criticized Chief Justice Cho Hee-dae for engaging in political activities, labeling him a 'political player.' Current affairs critic Park Sang-kyu criticized this view, emphasizing that the Chief Justice is an independent institution exercising the constitutional right to recommend Supreme Court Justices. He questioned, "How many citizens would agree with the perception that Chief Justice Cho Hee-dae is not a politician, let alone a political player?" arguing that framing the Chief Justice as a politician is unfair.

Regarding the failed meeting between the Blue House and the Chief Justice, current affairs critic Park Sang-kyu cited the explanation of Noh Kyung-pil, Chief of the National Court Administration, and raised the possibility of the Blue House refusing the meeting. He explained that initially, an attempt was made for a face-to-face recommendation, but since the Blue House did not schedule it, the recommendation had to be submitted in writing. The critic argued, "Didn't they try to make a face-to-face recommendation but were told it wasn't possible? Wasn't it that they couldn't get a schedule, so they had no choice but to submit it in writing?" emphasizing that the written recommendation was not a break from custom but a choice forced by the Blue House's non-cooperation. He mentioned the possibility that President Lee Jae-myung's office might have refused the meeting schedule, leading to the absence of a face-to-face recommendation.

Sung Ki-yong, Presidential Senior Secretary for Public Relations, appeared on OhmyNewsTV and refuted Chief Noh Kyung-pil's remarks as false, but was criticized for his vague and ambiguous answers. Current affairs critic Park Sang-kyu pointed out that while Secretary Sung acknowledged that there was a request from the Supreme Court, he only repeated a general answer that discussions would take place if an agreement was reached. He criticized, "So, while he said that Chief Noh Kyung-pil's story was different from the facts, he couldn't provide specific details and seemed to acknowledge that there was a request from the Supreme Court, merely giving a general answer that they would discuss it if an agreement was reached."

Current affairs critic Park Sang-kyu pointed out that despite being a former journalist, Senior Secretary for Public Relations Sung Ki-yong failed to provide accurate facts regarding the failed meeting. He argued that a public relations secretary should clearly state why Chief Noh Kyung-pil's words were not true and who did not schedule the meeting. The critic stated, "If he's a former journalist, he should state the facts as to why it's not true. Who didn't schedule the meeting?" emphasizing that unclear explanations only amplify suspicions.

Current affairs critic Park Sang-kyu strongly criticized the Presidential Senior Secretary for Public Relations' method of explaining himself by appearing on so-called 'left-wing YouTube.' He argued that a public relations secretary should express official positions through established media or an interview with Yonhap News, where he served as president. The critic stated, "The Presidential Senior Secretary for Public Relations shouldn't go on left-wing YouTube to tell his story. I'm not saying he should go on right-wing YouTube either, but he should at least go on proper media, on established media, or give an interview through Yonhap News, where he was president. What kind of undignified act is it to go on that YouTube?" criticizing that communication through specific YouTube channels makes it difficult to gain consensus and lowers dignity.

Current affairs critic Park Sang-kyu expressed strong concern over Assemblyman Park Sung-joon calling Noh Kyung-pil, Chief of the National Court Administration, a 'collaborator.' He emphasized that 'collaborator' is a very negative term referring to someone who cooperated with hostile forces during the Japanese colonial period or the Korean War, and that it is completely inapplicable to Chief Noh Kyung-pil. The critic questioned, "Park Sung-joon called Noh Kyung-pil, Chief of the National Court Administration, a collaborator. I was very surprised. What is a collaborator? It refers to someone who helped and cooperated with the enemy during the Japanese colonial era or the Korean War. What did Chief Noh Kyung-pil collaborate on?" criticizing that using such inappropriate language in politics goes against public sentiment and diminishes political dignity. He stressed that the practice of emotionally criticizing without regard for the dictionary meaning and context of words must stop.