[ad_1]
22nd interrogation for suspension of disciplinary action
The same as in the case of an exclusion claim, but
Procedure · “Unpredictable” Complex Difference Multiplication Formal Method
On the 20th, the Supreme Prosecutor’s Office in Seocho-dong, Seoul. Yunhap news
Tensions inside and outside the prosecution are rising as the judicial questioning approaches on the “request for suspension of the execution of disciplinary action” that will determine the fate of Attorney General Yoon Seok-yeol. This is because it is an unprecedented lawsuit against the attorney general’s disciplinary action, and there are probably more variables to consider than the case of Yoon’s request for suspension of the exclusion of duties, which was previously tried by the court.
In particular, it is unpredictable how the disciplinary level of ‘two months of honesty’, which has been controversial since the time of the announcement, will affect the court’s ruling. For this reason, the reaction of “the situation in which the conclusion cannot be predicted in any direction” is dominant in the legal profession.
The key issue to be addressed in this ‘review of a request for stay of execution’ that took place in the Seoul Administrative Court on the 22nd is apparently the same as in the exclusion of duties case in which it was taken a ‘partial citation’ decision on the 1st of this month. As in the case of an ordinary request for stay of enforcement, such as △ if there is any damage that is difficult to recover, △ if there is an urgent need, and △ if there is a risk that it could have a significant impact on public welfare. The validity of the grounds for disciplinary action is an important judgment criterion in the case of a main lawsuit, but it does not end directly at the hearing of a request for stay of enforcement.
Initially, there were many predictions around the prosecution and courts that “ President Yoon will be subject to severe disciplinary action at the level of dismissal or dismissal ” and therefore “ as in the case of exclusion, there is a high possibility that suspension of the disciplinary application will be cited. ” Regarding the dismissal, the court said: “This is a measure that has the same result as the dismissal of the attorney general, and is outside the purpose of the attorney general’s mandate (two years). Even if the judges were different, it was speculated that they wouldn’t apply the same logic.
However, the situation changed when Yoon’s disciplinary committee chose an unexpected “two months of honesty” card at dawn on the 16th. Since President Yoon’s term is until July 25 next year, it is difficult to say that the “two months” vacancy of the remaining seven months in office may be considered “difficult to recover”. There is a high probability of disagreement on whether there is an urgency. In fact, when the disciplinary level was revealed at the time, the prosecution also interpreted: “Is it not possible to take the criticism of ‘Yongdusami discipline’ to avoid somehow citing the stay of execution?”
From the court’s point of view, the general assessment is that concerns have deepened. Lawyer Kim Han-gyu, who served as the president of the Seoul Bar Association, explained: “In the case of public servants in general, if it is ‘two months honest’, they will rarely request suspension of the execution first. ” did. In filing this lawsuit, President Yoon also emphasized that “there could be harm equivalent to firing for two months of honesty” on the grounds of “concerns about disruptions in nuclear power plant investigations. In other words, it is not easy to be recognized as an irreparable loss in yourself for “two months of honesty.”
The fact that there are formal and procedural differences between disciplinary action and exclusion from duty also complicates the calculation method. When the effect of the dismissal was suspended, the court said: “Considering that the Attorney General is appointed by the President and the verification is carried out by the staff hearing of the National Assembly, It has to be done.” However, this time, the The situation is completely different at the time of the exclusion of functions ordered by the Minister of Justice, Choo Mi-ae, as it passed through the decision of the disciplinary committee and the presidential residence.
Joonki jeong reporter [email protected]
Subscribe to the Hankook Ilbo News Naver channel
Balance to see the world, the Hankook Ilbo Copyright © Hankookilbo
[ad_2]
