Jung Seong-eun Consulted with Park Ji-won?..."The Director Did Not Want or Discuss the Date" Statement Controversy

Screenshot of SBS 8 o'clock news aired on the 12th.

[Asia Economy Choi Seok-jin, Legal Affairs Specialist Reporter] Jo Seong-eun, the whistleblower who previously met with Park Ji-won, the Director of the National Intelligence Service (NIS), before Newsbus's report on the 'gobal saju' (accusation commission) allegations but claimed that they did not discuss the issue at all, has caused a stir by stating in a broadcast interview that "the director neither wanted nor discussed the date."

As former Prosecutor General Yoon Seok-yeol's side accuses the NIS of interfering in the presidential election in what they call the 'Park Ji-won Gate' and has announced plans to file a complaint against Director Park, Jo's remarks are expected to intensify the opposition party's attacks.

On the afternoon of the 12th, Jo, the whistleblower of the 'gobal saju' allegations, said in a pre-recorded interview aired on SBS 8 o'clock News, "Actually, the date of September 2 was neither a date that our director or I wanted nor a date that I was consulted on or accommodated."

September 2 is the date when Newsbus first reported the allegations of Yoon's 'gobal saju.' It was confirmed that Jo met Director Park on August 11 at a hotel restaurant in Seoul, about 20 days before that.

When the news anchor asked, "It is recorded that you met Park Ji-won, Director of the NIS, on August 11. Could you please tell us how the meeting took place and whether this topic was discussed at that time?" Jo replied, "Actually, when I was a Supreme Council member of the People's Party, he was our party leader, and even after he finished being the party leader, I helped him a lot when he appeared on various media programs. We had a very close and respectful relationship, and I naturally could have a meal with him. Also, I know that our director already interacts well with other journalists and people."

When the anchor said again, "The reason I keep asking is that there was a meeting between the time you first talked to this internet media outlet and the time it became known, so such speculations seem to arise," Jo said, "That's right. I think those parts can raise doubts. Actually, I thought this was a very serious case. After opening the accusation letter, I suspected that 'Son Jun-sung sent it,' and that Son Jun-sung must be a prosecutor. I thought it was a very important case, so I found it embarrassing but difficult to approach further. Because of the date and the period, I keep getting framed and attacked, but the date of September 2 was neither a date our director or I wanted nor a date I was consulted on or accommodated."

Jo continued, "It was just the date that reporter Lee Jin-dong decided to 'go for it,' so I called it an 'accident.' If reporter Lee Jin-dong had chosen a date in October, it would have been October, or if it had been December, it would have been December. This date has no relation at all. I have detailed this on SNS today, but I cannot tell anyone who might be at risk or who might be aware of this from the parties involved."

Surprised by Jo's unexpected answer, the anchor hurriedly tried to manage the situation by asking again, "So you are confirming that you did not discuss this matter with Director Park Ji-won?"

Jo replied, "Yes, of course. Because not recently but in the past, I know that the director has friendly relations with Prosecutor General Yoon Seok-yeol, Special Prosecutor Park Young-soo, and various party advisers. Since he served on the Judiciary Committee for a long time, I know he has had friendly relations even before being the Prosecutor General, such as when he was the Central District Prosecutor."

The anchor asked again, "Are you saying that you could not speak carelessly because you did not know the relationship between Director Park Ji-won and former Prosecutor General Yoon Seok-yeol?" Jo answered, "Yes."

When the anchor asked, "Then why did you describe it as a moment of 'talking with history' on SNS?" Jo said, "Isn't that a very historic position? I spoke very simply. I don't think this moment is historic. I think this is just a process of uncovering criminal facts, not history. I don't think it deserves that."

The anchor confirmed, "So you just gave meaning to talking with Director Park Ji-won?" Jo answered, "Yes."

When the anchor mentioned, "Some say there were others present at the time," Jo replied, "No, only many security guards were there."

When asked, "So only two people had the meal together?" Jo answered, "Yes."

Meanwhile, early in the interview, when the anchor asked, "Let's go back to April 3 last year. Can I still see the Telegram chat room you received from Assemblyman Kim Woong here?" Jo replied, "Actually, I cannot disclose those parts. Many circumstantial evidences have already been made public, and materials that have been submitted or disclosed have been left to the judgment of investigative agencies, so there is no need to describe them further. I can talk about additional circumstances or additional evidence."

When the anchor said, "So you mean there are additional circumstances or evidence?" Jo answered, "Yes, that's right."

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