‘Suk-yeol Yoon Discipline’ Policy Will End On The 15th … General Yoon’s Lawsuit Against Disciplinary Action

The Disciplinary Committee is known to terminate after making a disciplinary decision at the second meeting.
President Yoon seems to keep pointing out procedural flaws … Witness questioning is also of interest
Whether the Constitutional Constitution accepts Yun’s request and stops the disciplinary committee process is also a variable.

The second meeting of the Disciplinary Commission of the Prosecutor of the Ministry of Justice will be held on the 15th to determine the disciplinary action of the Attorney General Yoon Seok-yeol. The disciplinary committee plans to decide and end the discipline at the second meeting. Yoon is expected to continue to point out the disciplinary committee’s procedural flaws.

The disciplinary committee will hold a second meeting at 10:30 am on the 15th at the Ministry of Justice of the Government’s Gwacheon Complex. While the first meeting on the 10th focused on procedural discussions, witness cross-examinations, a statement of final opinions by President Yoon, and committee discussions and resolutions will take place at the second meeting.

At the second meeting, President Yoon is likely to argue that there is a procedural illegality of the disciplinary committee, including a disciplinary complaint. Yoon argued that the first meeting of the day was illegal and should be canceled. When the Minister of Justice had a reason for dismissal and there were 6 members of the disciplinary committee, it was illegal to keep the disciplinary committee with 6 members without a spare member at the first meeting. On the 14th, President Yoon will submit a written opinion to the disciplinary committee calling for reorganization because the composition of the disciplinary committee is illegal, and will request the Ministry of Justice to disclose information regarding the appointment date of a preliminary member. The disciplinary committee is known to be in a position that there is no problem with the selection of a preliminary member because the legal requirements are met if a majority votes on the attendance of the disciplinary committee quorum.

Yoon’s side opposed the disciplinary committee procedure at the first meeting, but most of the disciplinary committees did not accept it. Yoon’s side asked the disciplinary committee on the 12th to conduct a cross-examination of witnesses at the second meeting, but the disciplinary committee refused. The disciplinary committee said: “Unlike the newspaper of witnesses in criminal proceedings, only the committee can question and respond to witnesses in the disciplinary committee’s questioning.” “If the disciplinary committee holds the meeting unfairly, we will continue to object and keep it on the record,” said attorney Wan-gyu Lee, a special counsel for Yoon’s call. Yoon is also expected to argue that the six disciplinary charges brought by the Ministry of Justice have different facts or are not grounds for disciplinary action.

A fierce battle is expected in the questioning of witnesses in the second encounter. Four people, including the prosecutor of the Ministry of Justice Ryu-hyuk, the supervisor of the Ulsan district attorney’s office Park Young-jin, the chief prosecutor of the Ulsan district prosecutor’s office, Sohn Jun-seong, the Chief Prosecutor of the Investigation Information Bureau, and Daejeon District Attorney Lee Jeong-hwa represent the office of President Yoon. Four people, including the Supreme Prosecutor’s Office of the Public Prosecutor’s Office Han Dong-soo, the Seoul Central District Prosecutor’s Office, Jeong Jin-woong, the Gwangju District Prosecutor’s Office and Sim Jae-cheol, the Prosecutor’s Office of the Ministry of Justice , make adverse statements from Yoon.

It is reported that the disciplinary committee plans to continue the meeting even if there are no witnesses present. “I have no intention of withdrawing my witness request. They asked me to send a subpoena to the disciplinary committee (to the absent witness). “

Han-joong Jung, chairman of the disciplinary committee, and Hankuk University of Foreign Studies School of Law, made a statement regarding the intent of the decision to make a disciplinary decision for President Yoon at the second meeting in Tonghua and put end to disciplinary committee. “It will be difficult to complete the cross-examination of eight witnesses in one day,” Lee said.

It is also a variable whether the Constitutional Court will stop the disciplinary committee proceedings after accepting Yun’s request. General Yoon filed a constitutional complaint, pointing out that the current prosecutor’s disciplinary law, which led to the formation of a disciplinary commission headed by the Minister of Justice, was unconstitutional and requested a precautionary measure demanding the suspension of the commission’s proceedings. disciplinary. On the 11th, President Yoon submitted an additional document to the constitution requesting a speedy decision on whether to accept the request for a temporary injunction. If the Constitutional Constitution accepts President Yun’s request for an injunction, the disciplinary committee will be suspended until the Constitutional Constitution decides whether the Prosecutor’s Disciplinary Law is unconstitutional.

It is noted that President Yun’s disciplinary action will be decided at the 2nd meeting as the policy of the disciplinary committee. The disciplinary commission is expected to maintain two deadlines and raise the justification of procedural legitimacy. Upon being fired or fired, Yun will lose his position as president. Since the president’s term is until July next year, even if he is suspended for six months, he will be removed from office. President Yoon’s position is that he will file an administrative complaint against any disciplinary action.

Controversy that the formation of the disciplinary committee has been partial is expected to continue, as President Chung has been in charge of the director of the supervised agency of the Ministry of Justice since this year. The Government Justice Corporation is a public institution that conducts national trials on behalf of the government. It is supervised by the Minister of Justice and has the right to appoint and remove officials. Jeong said, “Isn’t that the same as all vice ministers of justice and prosecutors (who are disciplinary members) within the human resources of the minister of justice”?