Kim Nam-guk: "Arrest Warrant Despite Inconsistent Accomplice Testimonies? Political Warrant"

"The Party's Adoption of the Motion to Reject the Arrest Consent Has Major Side Effects"

[Asia Economy Reporter Lee Ji-eun] Amid speculation that the Central District Prosecutors' Office could file an arrest warrant for Lee Jae-myung, leader of the Democratic Party of Korea, as early as the 15th, Democratic Party lawmaker Kim Nam-guk criticized this as a "political warrant."

On the same day, Kim said on SBS's 'Kim Tae-hyun's Political Show,' "When an arrest warrant is filed, it is usually due to concerns of evidence destruction, flight risk, or if the crime itself is serious. In the case of Representative Lee, he is the leader of the main opposition party, and he has appeared every time he was summoned," he said.

[Image source=Yonhap News]

The prosecution is expected to file an arrest warrant for Representative Lee as early as that day, or at the latest during the week. The charges applied include breach of trust related to Daejang-dong and third-party bribery related to Seongnam FC.

He pointed out, "The people the prosecution is investigating as accomplices are all currently detained, so it seems there is no reason for evidence destruction to justify detention," adding, "Furthermore, looking at the reports coming out about Daejang-dong and such, the testimonies of the main accomplices do not match."

He continued, "Yoo Dong-gyu claims to be exposing various things, but he only gives testimonies that contradict or reverse his previous statements to the prosecution," and emphasized, "If we are to consider these reversed testimonies credible, then the statements of the four accomplices?Nam Wook, Kim Man-bae, Yoo Dong-gyu, and Jung Young-hak?should be consistent."

Lawmaker Kim said, "Filing an arrest warrant in a situation where there are only reversed testimonies regarding the main charges and no consistency among the accomplices is a political warrant aimed at removing political opponents, isn't it?" and added, "Without presenting clear physical evidence and relying solely on reversed testimonies to file an arrest warrant is unreasonable in my view."

He also pointed out that adopting a party stance to reject a motion for consent to arrest could have significant side effects. Kim said, "To adopt a party stance, a party meeting must be held. In the meeting, there should be a debate on pros and cons, and only when the majority agrees can it be adopted as the party stance. However, when some oppose, their opinions are reported by the media as major conflicts outside the party," adding, "and that small conflict is reported as a big issue, which is burdensome."

He continued, "Since the vote is anonymous and secret, it is difficult to verify whether someone actually voted in favor or against, and it is also difficult to enforce. Therefore, I think it is rather difficult to establish this as a party stance. The side effects are large and the effectiveness is minimal."

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