[단독]Is the great sword of Tonggigak squeezed and emitted when the judge changes? Amazing time

On the morning of the 25th, the day after Minister of Justice Choo Mi-ae ordered the suspension of his duties against Attorney General Yoon Seok-yeol, a banner supporting President Yoon was placed at the entrance to the Supreme Prosecutor’s Office in Seocho-dong. [연합뉴스]

It was confirmed that the order for the seizure and search of the office of the Supreme Prosecutor’s Office of the Supreme Prosecutor’s Office of the Supreme Prosecutor’s Office in charge of investigative information was ‘allowed’ but was issued after the change of court. Meanwhile, the controversy over the illegal law intensifies as the head of the investigation team, who revealed differences in seizure and search, was excluded from the job.

According to JoongAng Ilbo’s coverage on the 26th, the inspection team headed by the Supreme Prosecutor’s Office of the Supreme Prosecutor’s Office Han Dong-soo requested a seizure and search warrant on the morning of the 24th, but it was dismissed around 8 p.m. that day. Later, when the order was requested again, the judge was replaced and a seizure order was issued. It follows the principle that an exclusive judge of the order will be replaced when claiming.

The changed judge is Kim Dong-hyun, the chief judge in charge of court orders at the Seoul Central District Court. Judge Kim issued an arrest warrant for former Channel A reporter Lee Dong-jae related to the Channel A case in July.

At the time, it was assessed that it was unusual for an arrest warrant to be issued on charges of “attempted coercion”, where cases of punishment were extremely rare. There were also suspicions that the motive for the broadcast was “political”. It is because he wrote: “Arrest investigations are considered unavoidable at this stage, even to restore the trust of the media and the prosecution.”

Minister of Justice Cho Mi-ae, Supreme Prosecutor Han Dong-soo [뉴시스·연합뉴스]

There is also criticism at the time when the Minister of Justice, Choo Mi-ae, announced the exclusion of functions and the time of the request and issuance of the seizure order. According to the Law on the Prosecutor’s Office and the Presidential Decree on the Prosecutor’s Office, the Supreme Prosecutor’s Office is an organization under the command of the Attorney General, and the Minister of Justice is stipulated that only the President can command in specific cases under current law. .

On the 24th, when the claimed confiscation order was issued, Minister Chu announced disciplinary action and exclusion from duties against Attorney General Yoon Seok-yeol, referring to the ‘suspicion of catching the trend of the judges. The Supreme Prosecutor’s Office requested an arrest warrant that same day and executed the arrest warrant the following day, 25.

Meanwhile, prosecutors who pointed out the illegality of the seizure and search were excluded from the investigation. The Chief of Staff of the 3rd Division of the Prosecutor’s Office, the Supreme Prosecutor’s Office, Jeong Tae-won, expressed his opposition to the seizure and search of the former Office of Investigative Information Policy Officer (now Office of Investigative Information Officer ) from the Research Department the day before. However, after expressing their disagreement, they were excluded from the job, and two people, including Supervision Section 3, Heo Jeong-soo, participated in the actual seizure and execution of the search.

Reporters Jeong Yu-jin and Kim Soo-min [email protected]