Judge “It’s just a speculation of’doubt of political neutrality’… No reason for disciplinary action is admitted”

View larger-First of all, the court judged that the’irreparable damages’ arising from the two-month suspension of punishment against President Yoon was greater than the’damage of public welfare’ that occurred when the disciplinary effect was suspended. The court said, “Considering the legal status of the prosecutor general and the term of office of the prosecutor general, this damage is a damage that cannot be compensated with money unless there are special circumstances.” It is a loss in case of remarkably difficult.” However, the judiciary did not accept the argument that Yoon had suggested so far that “the prosecution organization and the damage to society as a whole due to the damage to the rule of law are linked together”. In addition, he did not admit any claims that it could disrupt the investigation of the Wolseong nuclear power plant.

The judge said, “As President Yoon argues, retaliation for the investigation of living power and the purpose of deterring the investigation of passport personnel were not elucidated.” Considering the fact that it has existed since the time, there is no reason for such an argument.” At the same time, the judiciary did not accept the allegation of’damaging public welfare’ due to the return of the Ministry of Justice’s job as President Yoon. The Ministry of Justice insisted that the disciplinary action against Yoon was a legitimate personnel right exercised by the President, the head of the administration, against the Prosecutor General, a member of the administration, and should not be infringed. Regarding this, the judge pointed out that “the Ministry of Justice claims that public welfare may be violated, such as instability of the administration and division of national opinion, but it cannot be concluded that it has a significant impact on public welfare.”

In addition, the Ministry of Justice’s allegations that the exercise of fair prosecution rights could be threatened, such as investigations against the Supreme Prosecutor General’s Officer and Justice Minister Chu Mi-ae, due to the return of President Yoon, was dismissed.

○ “Some violations of disciplinary procedures, charges require additional hearing”

The judges saw that there were some flaws in the disciplinary proceedings of President Yun. At the first disciplinary committee held on the 10th of this month, the disciplinary committee members rejected the decision by three members of the request for challenge from President Yoon. In response, the court judged that the total number of disciplinary committee members was seven, and thus more than four (4) of them had to have participated in the evasion decision, and that it was invalid. The Ministry of Justice insisted that “one member who has been challenged should be subtracted from the quorum of votes, and it can be voted against by the attendance of three or more of the six members,” but the court did not accept it. In addition, the judge said that it is difficult to conclude that the violation of political neutrality is “inappropriate words and actions. He did not admit it as a ground for disciplinary action, saying, “The grounds for the disciplinary committee’s misconduct that’makes doubt about political neutrality’ are only speculation.” Among the four reasons for the disciplinary action of President Yoon, the court said, “There is a risk of abuse, so it is very inappropriate and the same type of document should not be prepared in the future.” “Do it”.

On that day, the Ministry of Justice may go through complaint procedures such as appeal. However, in the case of an appeal for suspension of execution in the legal community, it is difficult to come to a conclusion in a short time, and in fact, this decision is considered to be the last decision to be made by the court within the term of President Yoon.

Wonmo Yoo [email protected] · Reporter Go Ceramics