Shin Dong-geun "Geum Tae-seop's outrageous remark, a thief sees only thieves" vs Geum Tae-seop "Answer the question"

Shin Dong-geun, a member of the Democratic Party of Korea, is being interviewed at the National Assembly Members' Office Building in Yeouido, Seoul, on August 14. Photo by Kang Jin-hyung aymsdream@

[Asia Economy Reporter Kim Young-eun] On the 9th, Shin Dong-geun, a Supreme Council Member of the Democratic Party of Korea, criticized former Democratic Party lawmaker Geum Tae-seop, who called the amendment to the High-ranking Officials' Crime Investigation Office (HOCI) Act the 'Woo Byung-woo Act,' saying, "A thief only sees thieves, and a monk only sees monks. It is seeing the world with prejudice according to one's true nature." In response, former lawmaker Geum again said, "Please do not respond with personal attacks and give a proper answer," continuing the heated exchange.

At the Supreme Council meeting held at the National Assembly that morning, Supreme Council Member Shin said, "Although former lawmaker Geum resigned as a prosecutor a long time ago, he proved that the DNA of a prosecutor's true nature still lives and breathes." He added, "I saw that his existence was merely a satellite orbiting the planet called prosecutor," and criticized, "Otherwise, he would not have made the outrageous remark that the HOCI Act is the Woo Byung-woo Act."

Earlier, on the 8th, when the amendment to the HOCI Act passed the full meeting of the National Assembly's Legislation and Judiciary Committee, former lawmaker Geum posted on his Facebook, "I hope Democratic Party lawmakers will stop for a moment and think about what they are doing now," and said, "Is it reasonable to cheer for prosecutorial reform after creating the 'Woo Byung-woo Act'?" He also pointed out, "Creating a power institution that can investigate and prosecute judges and prosecutors and allowing the head of that institution to be appointed practically at the president's discretion is hard to find even in dictatorial countries."

Supreme Council Member Shin said, "I really do not understand why he, a staunch opponent of HOCI to the core as a prosecutor, joined the Democratic Party, applied for nomination, and even became a lawmaker," and added, "I even suspect that whether it was the Democratic Party or Ahn Cheol-soo, it might have been just a temporary station for his political advancement."

He continued, "When former lawmaker Geum calmly announced his intention to run for Seoul mayor shortly after leaving the Democratic Party, I felt it was bizarre," and criticized, "I think it would be better for former lawmaker Geum to work as a lawyer specializing in gifts and inheritance rather than politics."

Former lawmaker Geum Tae-seop, who left the Democratic Party of Korea, is giving a lecture at the 'Myeongbulheojeon' meeting of first-term lawmakers of the People Power Party at the National Assembly Members' Office Building on the 18th of last month. Photo by Yonhap News

In response, on the afternoon of the 9th, former lawmaker Geum again wrote on Facebook, "Those who abandon reason and debate are not progressives. I have a question for Representative Shin Dong-geun," and said, "I can laugh off personal attacks, but what I was truly worried about is that nowhere in Representative Shin Dong-geun's remarks can I find an answer to the issues I raised."

He then asked Supreme Council Member Shin, "In which country in the world is there a power institution that monopolizes investigative and prosecutorial authority over judges and prosecutors?" and questioned, "Since even the opposition's veto power was removed, is there any check to prevent the appointment of a strange person (citing Woo Byung-woo as an example) by an authoritarian regime that would undermine judicial independence and prosecutorial neutrality?"

He added, "Responding to opposing voices with personal attacks is not progressive," and emphasized, "I believe that Representative Shin Dong-geun, who once belonged to the progressive camp and still considers himself progressive, will give a sincere and substantive answer."

This content was produced with the assistance of AI translation services.