Rejection of Supreme Court Justice Appointment Exacerbates Political Conflict

Notably, he delivered a speech criticizing Assemblyman Jung Chung-rae immediately after presenting him with a bouquet and a plaque of appreciation.

Host Choi Dae-hyun likened this to 'giving flowers and then slapping them' and 'insulting them.'

However, the hosts criticized the apology's sincerity, citing the phrase "I ask for understanding if I caused discomfort." They took issue with his attitude, which seemed to demand understanding of the situation rather than directly reflecting on his own actions.

This manner of apology raised questions about whether it was a perfunctory apology made belatedly after the controversy over Representative Kim's remarks grew. The hosts pointed out that Representative Kim's apology was merely a means to quell public criticism, not a genuine act of remorse.

This reform plan was set to take effect on September 1, raising questions about the reasons behind the cancellation.

Host Choi Dae-hyun explained the cancellation, stating, "The basic pension reform plan was originally scheduled to be announced today, but it was suddenly canceled an hour before the announcement." The government's reversal of policy announcements can cause public confusion.

Some have suggested that the government, conscious of declining approval ratings, postponed the announcement of a reform plan that could be perceived as a 'populist policy.' This led to criticism that the government was prioritizing public opinion over policy effectiveness.

Along with this, criticism continued regarding the increase in crimes related to Chinese nationals in Jeju Island and the issue of visa-free entry. There is growing criticism that while welfare benefits for South Korean citizens are being reduced, excessive support policies for foreigners are being implemented.

Despite an unexpected large amount of tax revenue due to economic factors such as increased semiconductor tax revenue, criticism was raised that the utilization plan was not transparent. In particular, concerns were voiced that allocating a large sum to the ambiguous Future Fund could lead to lax fiscal management.

He questioned the inconsistency of government policy, asking, "Didn't Lee Jae-myung appoint the Bank of Korea governor? And on the other hand, they're tightening the money supply. What are they trying to do?"

This situation raised concerns that it could impose a double burden of increased household debt and economic recession on citizens. In a situation where high interest rates are increasing the interest burden on businesses and households, critics argued that the government's wasteful use of additional tax revenue would harm fiscal soundness and pass the burden on to future generations.

The host strongly criticized the government's fiscal waste, comparing it to 'Kongjwi and Patjwi with a broken pot.' This implies that the government is unable to control fiscal expenditures and is spending money on unnecessary things. It was argued that given the current economic situation, the government should ensure fiscal soundness through austerity measures.

Fiscal expansion in a high-interest environment could further fuel inflation, potentially neutralizing the Bank of Korea's efforts to raise interest rates. Economic experts emphasized that stable economic management requires consistency between the government's monetary and fiscal policies. However, it is pointed out that the current government's policies are moving in conflicting directions, increasing economic uncertainty.

Park Sang-gyu emphasized that the site is a shared facility (COV) with the U.S. military and a strategic stronghold where F-22 and F-35 fighter jets must take off and land in case of emergency.

Park Sang-gyu explained, "They want to quickly vacate the Gwangju Military Airport, but it's a shared COV airport with the U.S. military. Yes, yes. The U.S. military's site accounts for about 9% of the total area. But the reason this is important is that you shouldn't underestimate it just because it's 9% of the area; this is where F-22s and F-35s, fighter-bombers deployed from mainland U.S. or Okinawa, must take off and land in an emergency." In other words, though small in area, its strategic importance is very high. Public opposition is growing against converting a military facility site directly linked to national security for private corporate use.

He mentioned that since the 1962 Constitution under the Rhee Syng-man government, the President's veto power over Supreme Court Justice appointments has been explicitly prohibited. This led to the argument that the President has no legal basis to reject a Supreme Court Justice appointment recommendation. Kang Dae-gyu strongly criticized this presidential rejection as setting back the spirit of the Constitution to pre-60s levels.

Some argue that interpreting the President as having no authority to reject a Supreme Court Justice appointment recommendation could contradict the constitutional principle of separation of powers. However, the core of Kang Dae-gyu's argument is that the current Constitution and relevant statutes do not clearly stipulate that the President can reject a Supreme Court Justice candidate recommended by the Chief Justice.

He argued, "They are saying that the Chief Justice did not directly meet the President to recommend the appointment... The direct meeting for appointment is also just a custom, not explicitly stated in law."

He stated that a direct meeting between the President and the Chief Justice is merely a custom without legal basis, and current law dictates that the Supreme Court Justice appointment process should follow modernized systems like electronic litigation. Kang Dae-gyu also pointed out that rejecting only one of two candidates was unfair. This led to criticism that the President's rejection was a political act disguised as a procedural issue.

The People Power Party has labeled the President's rejection a constitutional violation, even mentioning the possibility of impeachment. Therefore, attention is focused on what stance the Chief Justice will take. The Chief Justice's position is expected to be a major variable in future political developments.

Kang Dae-gyu cited the past case of Prime Minister Han Duck-soo (then acting President) not appointing a Constitutional Court Justice to argue that Representative Lee Jae-myung's rejection of the Supreme Court Justice recommendation is unconstitutional. He stated, "Han Duck-soo, then acting President, expressing his refusal to appoint a Constitutional Court Justice was unconstitutional as it violated a specific affirmative constitutional duty... Lee Jae-myung has also equally violated Article 104 of the Constitution."

This emphasizes that the President's act of appointment is not merely an authority but a specific constitutional duty. By raising the issue of fairness between the special prosecutor's argument and the current President's reasoning for rejecting the Supreme Court Justice recommendation, he highlighted the high likelihood of Representative Lee's actions being unconstitutional.

He compared past constitutional provisions with current interpretations, stating that the President's possibility of rejection is slim under current law.

AI analysis results also supported the conclusion that the President's possibility of rejecting the appointment is low. This shows that even among legal experts, interpretations of the President's exercise of power vary. He again referred to the Han Duck-soo impeachment precedent, emphasizing that the President has a specific constitutional duty to appoint.

Therefore, Representative Lee Jae-myung's act of rejecting the Supreme Court Justice appointment recommendation is unlikely to escape the controversy of violating a constitutional duty, beyond mere political judgment. Attention is now focused on the Chief Justice's official statement and the judiciary's response.

Judge Kim Min-gi has a history of acquitting Kim Man-bae in the Daejang-dong case, and it is known that her husband is Oh Young-jun, a Constitutional Court Justice appointed by Representative Lee Jae-myung.

The host commented, "Judge Kim Min-gi, recommended by Seo Young-kyo, is the judge who acquitted Kim Man-bae in Daejang-dong, and the problem is that Judge Kim Min-gi's husband is Constitutional Court Justice Oh Young-jun, appointed by Lee Jae-myung." This raised concerns that the check and balance function between the Supreme Court and the Constitutional Court could be lost.

If Judge Kim Min-gi is appointed as a Supreme Court Justice, individuals directly or indirectly connected to Representative Lee Jae-myung would be positioned in both the Supreme Court and the Constitutional Court, raising serious questions about judicial independence and fairness. Such appointments are criticized for undermining the political neutrality of the judiciary and potentially leading to rulings favorable to specific political factions.

In particular, suspicions have been raised that there are movements to amend legal provisions unfavorable to him, such as the abolition of the crime of breach of trust and dismissal of charges, or to neutralize judicial procedures. This is seen as a 'self-amendment' attempt to reduce Representative Lee's legal risks and is criticized for shaking the foundation of the rule of law.

Such attempts to amend laws could seriously undermine the fairness of judicial procedures and erode public trust in the judiciary. The hosts expressed concern, pointing out that the current state of judicial procedures is far from the rule of law.

He stated, "On October 2nd, I don't know if this will go to the investigative agency or the prosecution agency. So, I truly feel that the judicial system is being butchered on the ground," explaining that it is difficult to give immediate answers to clients' questions. This shows the ambiguity of the current judicial system, which even legal experts find confusing.

Kang Dae-gyu mentioned that if the judicial panel changes due to court personnel shifts, judgments could be delayed or new arguments might be allowed. He said, "This is the court's judgment. I have actually talked about this a lot on PenNMike. Whether it goes to the Supreme Court or not, it's the discretion of each judicial panel, so if a different judge comes due to court personnel changes, new arguments can be made."

This means that the judicial panel's judgment is at its discretion, and if a new judge comes due to personnel changes, the existing trial procedures may have to be restarted from the beginning. Therefore, concerns were raised that judgments in major cases are highly likely to be delayed due to court personnel changes.

Therefore, he analyzed that the Seongnam Line personnel who have taken control of Cheong Wa Dae would have difficulty communicating smoothly with professional diplomats who are foreign service exam graduates.

Criticism was also raised that disregarding diplomatic expertise and the influence of hardliners within the Democratic Party are causing confusion in foreign policy. It was argued that an environment where diplomats find it difficult to exercise their expertise has been created, even leading to a phenomenon where competent diplomats avoid ambassadorial positions.

Kang Dae-gyu compared this to 'diplomats avoiding taking a sinking ship,' criticizing the problems of the current diplomatic system. This led to criticism that Representative Lee's leadership and personnel policies are weakening the nation's diplomatic capabilities.

He said, "I am very confident of a guilty verdict. He will argue innocence, but instead of focusing on innocence, he is pursuing strategies like dismissal of charges, withdrawal of charges, or acquittal through legal amendments. As someone in the legal field, I cannot understand this at all, and for such a person, the probability of a guilty verdict is very high."

Kang Dae-gyu pointed out that Representative Lee's side is making strategically inappropriate arguments, such as dismissal of charges, withdrawal of charges, or acquittal through legal amendments, rather than focusing on arguing innocence. He predicted that such a strategy is difficult for a lawyer to understand and could actually increase the likelihood of a guilty verdict. He also cautiously mentioned the possibility of imprisonment, forecasting that the ongoing trial process would have a significant impact on Representative Lee's political future.

He said, "If he declares, 'I will immediately face trial as soon as my term ends. You don't have to worry about that at all. I promise to attend the trials.' His approval ratings would go up immediately, but he won't do that."

He argued that since Representative Lee's legal risks are a major cause of his declining approval ratings, a political decision to confront them head-on is necessary. However, Kang Dae-gyu criticized Representative Lee for being unable to make such a decision, pointing out his lack of political decisiveness.

These suggestions imply that the more Representative Lee tries to avoid his legal risks, the deeper public distrust will become, and that confronting the trials squarely and declaring to forgo re-election is the way to overcome the political crisis. This provides important implications for Representative Lee's future actions.