Offensive Against Nominees Yong Hye-in and Kim Seung-won

Park Sung-jin stated that he resigned from his position on the Gender Equality and Family Youth Committee prior to the press conference. He emphasized that this was not a political decision to step down from a significant position, but a choice made to speak responsibly as a young person and a citizen. Committee member Park clarified that he is not against a youth minister per se, but insists on thorough verification of the nominee's qualifications and capabilities.

Despite nominee Yong's experience as an associate member of the National Assembly's latter half Gender Equality and Family Committee, the lack of relevant legislative achievements raises questions about her expertise.

Park Sung-jin pointed out that the potential for crime victims to not be adequately protected should be considered before political justifications for changing the investigation system, expressing concern about gaps in victim protection.

Park Min-jung raised an issue with nominee Yong Hye-in's stated intention to retain her proportional representation parliamentary seat even if appointed as minister. If the nominee were to step down from her parliamentary seat, the Basic Income Party would lose its parliamentary representation, meaning it would not receive approximately 1.1 billion won in annual current subsidies. Committee member Park criticized the choice to maintain both the ministerial position, the parliamentary seat, and the affiliated party's parliamentary status as being no different from the vested-interest politics she had previously criticized.

He explained that this action was not a political decision to relinquish a significant position, but rather to speak responsibly as a young person. This is interpreted as an intention to ensure the sincerity of his remarks during the verification process of nominee Yong Hye-in.

However, it was confirmed that none of these were related to the Women and Family Committee or the Gender Equality and Family Committee. This point amplifies doubts about nominee Yong's expertise and policy readiness in relevant fields as a candidate for Minister of Gender Equality and Family.

Park Min-jung demanded that nominee Yong Hye-in clearly explain whether her choice to hold both the ministerial position and a proportional representation parliamentary seat is for the benefit of the Korean people or to maintain the parliamentary status of her affiliated Basic Income Party. If the nominee were to relinquish her parliamentary seat, the Basic Income Party would lose its parliamentary representation and would not receive approximately 1.1 billion won in annual current subsidies. This is pointed out as an issue where public responsibility and the party's financial interests conflict.

Committee member Park publicly questioned whether nominee Kim would maintain his existing political stance that dismissal of charges in President Lee Jae-myung's cases is necessary, even after becoming Minister of Justice, thereby raising doubts about his political neutrality as Minister of Justice.

He emphasized that distrust in military service and gender conflict are undeniable realities in our society, and the experiences and problems faced by young men should not be marginalized. This is interpreted to mean that military service issues should be viewed from a perspective of social integration.

The fact that nominee Kim was a co-representative of the parliamentary group that demanded the dismissal of charges in the presidential case has not resolved doubts about his neutrality as Minister of Justice.

Park Sung-jin stated that he resigned from his position on the Gender Equality and Family Youth Committee prior to the press conference. He expressed his intention not to portray the resignation of a small position as a major political decision. Committee member Park opposed lowering verification standards for a ministerial nominee simply because they are young, demanding thorough scrutiny.

Based on this history, he demanded thorough verification of the nominee's expertise and policy preparedness required for Minister of Gender Equality and Family. The absence of legislative activity in relevant fields is leading to controversy over the nominee's suitability for the position.

Park Min-jung asserted that nominee Yong Hye-in must clearly explain whether her choice to hold both the ministerial position and a parliamentary seat is truly for the Korean people, or to maintain the parliamentary status of her affiliated Basic Income Party. If the nominee were to relinquish her parliamentary seat, the Basic Income Party would lose its parliamentary representation, making it difficult to receive approximately 1.1 billion won in annual current subsidies. This is pointed out as a conflict between the nominee's public responsibility and the party's financial interests.

While dual roles are permissible under current law, Park Min-jung raised suspicions that this choice aims to preserve the parliamentary status of her affiliated Basic Income Party. With the Basic Income Party potentially losing its parliamentary representation and approximately 1.1 billion won in annual current subsidies if the nominee resigns, criticism arises that the party's financial interests are intertwined.

Nominee Yong Hye-in was previously embroiled in controversy for privately using the Gimpo Airport VIP lounge during a family trip to Jeju in 2023. While the nominee's side paid the fee and apologized, Park Min-jung pointed out that this incident appears to be an issue of judgment for a public official to distinguish between public authority and private convenience. It was emphasized that a minister requires public service ethics beyond mere compliance with regulations.

The Minister of Gender Equality and Family position is for all citizens, not just a specific support base, raising concerns that the nominee's political actions could hinder national unity.

Park Sung-jin criticized nominee Yong Hye-in's vote in favor of the Criminal Procedure Act amendment, emphasizing that a nominee for Minister of Gender Equality and Family should first consider the potential for victims to not be adequately protected, rather than political justifications for changing the investigation system. Some women's groups have also expressed concerns that the abolition of prosecutors' direct supplementary investigative powers could lead to investigation gaps for victims of crimes such as sexual violence and domestic violence, making it difficult to secure their rights.

Park Sung-jin asked nominee Yong Hye-in whether she sufficiently reviewed the potential issues of investigation gaps and difficulty in obtaining redress for victims of crimes such as sexual violence and domestic violence, before voting in favor of abolishing prosecutors' direct supplementary investigative powers. He emphasized the need for concrete measures to prevent gaps in victim protection and demanded the nominee's policy preparedness.

Park Min-jung strongly criticized nominee Yong Hye-in's statement that she intends to retain her parliamentary seat. He asserted that she must clearly explain whether her choice to hold both the ministerial position and a parliamentary seat is for the Korean people or to maintain the parliamentary status of her affiliated Basic Income Party. Park mentioned that the Basic Income Party could lose approximately 1.1 billion won in annual current subsidies if the nominee resigns, raising questions about a situation where the party's financial interests and the minister's public responsibility might conflict. Furthermore, doubts about the distinction between public and private affairs were raised, as the nominee's spouse holds a party position.

This critique serves as a core basis for criticism regarding the nominee's lack of expertise and legislative capacity in the relevant field as a candidate for Minister of Gender Equality and Family. The absence of relevant legislative achievements amplifies doubts about the nominee's understanding of the role.

Concerns about potential gaps in crime victim protection due to the abolition of prosecutors' direct supplementary investigative powers have also been raised by some women's groups. This points to a criticism that reforms to the investigative system might conflict with the fundamental goal of victim protection.

As nominee Yong has stated her intention to retain her proportional representation parliamentary seat, a connection to maintaining the Basic Income Party's parliamentary status and approximately 1.1 billion won in annual current subsidies has been pointed out. Furthermore, with the nominee's spouse involved in party activities, questions about the distinction between public and private affairs continue, and additional explanation regarding the nominee's public service ethics is being demanded.

He emphasized that the current government's real estate policies and tax reforms have caused significant despair among the younger generation. This criticism leads to questions about the current government's policy direction and the economic difficulties faced by young people.