[ad_1]
Former Justice Minister Cho Kook attended the trial of his wife Chung Gyeong-shim, a professor at Dongyang University, as a witness to the allegations of illegal admission and private equity.
Former Minister Cho is exercising his right to veto testimony on all issues, claiming that the defendant is a spouse and is also separately charged as an accessory.
I’ll connect the reporters. Reporter Kang Hee-kyung!
Is this the first time that a couple have been in the same courtroom, but were not present together?
[기자]Yes, Cho Guk, a former Minister of Justice, was a witness at the trial of Professor Chung Gyeong-Shim from Dongyang University.
Since this is the first time since the indictment that the couple have appeared together in court, attention was drawn to the attendance situation.
The scene of the attendance was not disclosed as former Minister Cho entered a separate closed passage through the witness request process.
Professor Jeong, who was present in court around 9:40 am before the trial, entered the court without comment when asked by reporters how he felt about Cho’s testimony as a witness.
The trial began at 10 a.m. and Cho went to court around 10:10 after a simple procedure.
Usually when a witness arrives, the oath is taken first.
However, before the oath, Cho said that she would exercise her right to veto the testimony and requested that she wish to provide the reasons for her call after the oath.
However, the court did not allow comment, saying that the entire front page and the second paragraph on the back cover of the one-thirty positions prepared by former Minister Cho were not related to the right to refuse to testify.
In the end, former Minister Cho, who was only able to reveal the short position included in the reverse of the statement, said that he will exercise his right to veto testimony, a right granted by the Criminal Procedure Law, noting that the accused is his spouse and it is also charged separately.
He also added that while there is a prejudice against the exercise of the right to reject statements in our society, we hope that there is no prejudice in the courts.
[앵커]Former Minister Cho continued to veto testimony in the witness newspaper, right?
[기자]Yes, even after Cho’s stance, the Witness newspaper did not proceed immediately and the battle continued for a time.
The prosecution criticized Cho’s refusal to make a statement during the course of the investigation and criticized that she should testify more actively, not just through social media.
Former Minister Cho, who is a witness, was arrested by the judiciary in an attempt to answer directly, and Professor Jeong’s lawyer immediately refuted this.
The lawyers pointed out that it was difficult to understand that Cho was initially adopted as a witness, and that although he said he would refuse to testify, he could not understand why the prosecution was criticizing the exercise of his rights.
He then argued that if the prosecution asked each individual a question in a situation where they had no choice but to refuse to testify, they were only trying to come face-to-face by reporting that Cho was silent.
In response, the prosecution again refuted that it was unfair and regretted that the prosecution’s certification activities in public courts were shameful, saying it was because they were obliged to disclose the truth that witnesses cited despite special circumstances.
As the battle continued, the judges restricted his speech and the prosecution’s statement did not begin until 10:30 a.m.
However, in response to the prosecution’s question, Cho refused to answer all the answers, saying that he would exercise his right to refuse to testify under the Criminal Procedure Law.
The lawyer’s side again raised the issue that the prosecution’s question was using all of the content between the couple.
The Prosecutor’s Office refuted that it is a crime that has occurred in the process of managing assets formed jointly by the couple and that it is a part that needs to be proven.
The lawyer’s side objected to the conduct of the prosecution of the judo newspaper, but the court refused to testify and did not accept that the situation was not affected by the judo newspaper.
Amid denial of testimony and controversy, the morning trial was terminated, and prosecutors’ processing will proceed with the remaining processing beginning at 2:00 p.m., followed by cross-examination by attorneys. .
So far, YTN Kang Hee-kyung at the Seoul Central District Court[[email protected]]it is.
※ ‘Your report becomes news’ YTN is waiting for your valuable report.
[카카오톡] Search YTN to add a channel [전화] 02-398-8585 [메일] [email protected] [온라인 제보] www.ytn.co.kr
