On the morning of the 15th, when the second deliberation of the Prosecutors’ Disciplinary Committee against Prosecutor General Yoon Seok-yeol was held, disciplinary members are entering the Gwacheon Government Office of the Ministry of Justice. From the left, Han-jung Jeong, Assistant Secretary of the Prosecutors’ Discipline Committee, Yong-gu Lee, Vice Minister of Justice, Ahn Jin, Professor of Chonnam National University Law School, and Shin Seong-shik, Head of Anti-Corruption Forces, Supreme Prosecutors’ Office. [뉴스1]
– In the early morning of the 16th, the Prosecutors’ Disciplinary Committee (disciplinary committee) decided on a two-month suspension of disciplinary action against Prosecutor General Yoon Seok-yeol. This is the first disciplinary action against the prosecutor general. Contrary to some observations that the outline will be revealed by midnight the previous day at the latest, the conclusion was announced only at 4 am on the 16th.
In the legal community, the disciplinary committee unilaterally enforced the proceedings, and some analyzes say that the suspension of Yun was in fact already scheduled. The disciplinary committee’s position is that it concluded after a long period of’pain’ due to differences of opinion on the sentence. However, some prosecutors still have suspicion that the disciplinary committee has only pretended to be contemplated.
Disciplinary Committee to debate 7 hours after unilateral proceedings
–
The disciplinary committee conducted a second deliberation procedure on the 15th following the last 10th. At the deliberation that day, five witnesses were interrogated. The interrogation of the prosecutor’s office at the Ministry of Justice, which was adopted by the disciplinary committee ex officio, was canceled, and Director Shim expressed his opinion by submitting an affidavit. General Yoon’s side asked for continuation, saying that it needed time to review new evidence, including this, but the disciplinary committee declared that’the procedure will be terminated on this day’.
The disciplinary committee started debating from 9 pm when the statement of concluding opinion was canceled due to the backlash from President Yoon. According to Han-jung Jeong, an official representative of the disciplinary committee, a professor at the Graduate School of Law at Hankuk University of Foreign Studies, in the debate, the members gave several opinions on the level of disciplinary action for President Yoon.
At the end of the meeting, the Disciplinary Committee decided to dispose of President Yoon’s suspension for two months, and announced it at 4 am on the 16th. The disciplinary committee heard that ▶ preparation and distribution of documents analyzed by the judiciary in major cases ▶ interfering with the inspection and investigation of suspicion of attempted force on Channel A ▶ impairing the prestige of political neutrality as reasons for disciplinary action.
![Shin Seong-sik, head of the anti-corruption force of the Supreme Prosecutors' Office, is entering the Gwacheon government office on the morning of the 15th. [연합뉴스]](https://i0.wp.com/pds.joins.com/news/component/htmlphoto_mmdata/202012/17/66657f45-24a7-4ab8-850b-21a39784929d.jpg?w=900&ssl=1)
–
Shin Seong-sik, head of the anti-corruption force of the Supreme Prosecutors’ Office, is entering the Gwacheon government office on the morning of the 15th. [연합뉴스]
–
The reason it took 7 hours is “Lift”… Abandonment
–
After the deliberation, Professor Jeong told the reporters that “the amount was inconsistent and discussed for a long time.” The purpose of this is that it took a considerable amount of time because it was difficult to draw consensus conclusions regarding the level and duration of the discipline against President Yun. Prof. Jeong explained, “I couldn’t agree, so I continued to debate, and in the end it was unanimously (a conclusion),” said Professor Jeong.
In the course of discussion, it is said that the possibility of dismissal of President Yoon, and in the case of suspension, discussions about the period, such as 4 or 6 months. It is said that there was a debate on whether or not each of the charges of disciplinary action was established individually. The disciplinary committee explained that the time has been extended as there were many opinions.
Contrary to Professor Jeong’s explanation, the anti-corruption force chief Shin Seong-sik, who attended as a disciplinary committee member, said that all charges of disciplinary action were not recognized, and he abstained from deciding disposition. However, it is pointed out that Director Shin did not accept the recommendation of President Yoon’s evasion, and played a role in filling the quorum of members required for resolution.
An incumbent prosecutor pointed out, “Even though the situation to be avoided, such as being pointed out as a suspected suspected channel A incident, was a problem, it was a problem to participate in the resolution itself.” did.
![In the early morning of the 16th, Prosecutor General Yoon Seok-yeol, who has completed the second deliberation of the Prosecutor's Disciplinary Committee, is answering questions from reporters at the Ministry of Justice's office. [연합뉴스]](https://i0.wp.com/pds.joins.com/news/component/htmlphoto_mmdata/202012/17/0febddac-9d2b-4bb1-a51f-fe9018b32a36.jpg?w=900&ssl=1)
–
In the early morning of the 16th, Prosecutor General Yoon Seok-yeol, who has completed the second deliberation of the Prosecutor’s Disciplinary Committee, is answering questions from reporters at the Ministry of Justice’s office. [연합뉴스]
–
Some suspicion of “only showing the appearance of contemplation”
–
At that time, officials from the Ministry of Justice came out of the meeting, and the internal message is that the discussion was held with only the members present. Inside the prosecution, there is a suspicion that in fact, in the debate held as a’closed room debate,’ there was no in-depth discussion, but only the appearance of contemplating the conclusion. The reasons are that the suspension has been repeatedly discussed in recent passports, etc., the reaction of the disciplinary committee during the proceedings and the sudden termination of the proceedings despite the backlash from President Yoon.
A local prosecution officer said, “We may have already concluded the honesty, which is less burdensome than the super-heavy dismissal, and discussed the duration.” He guessed that he only showed the appearance of’I did it.’ Some even say that the action was taken in consideration of minimizing media reports that dealt with the disciplinary action of President Yun.
Prof. Jeong asked, “If we had decided on a conclusion, would we have done this?” and asked, “Who would it be better to drag down the (disciplinary procedure)?”
Reporters Na Unchae and Park Tae-in [email protected]
–
The results of the second deliberation of the Disciplinary Committee of the Prosecutor General Yoon Seok-yeol. Graphic = Kim Eun-kyo [email protected]
–
–
