- Legitimacy and Grave-Digging Controversies Causing Confusion? A Fierce Primary Is Not Bad
- Emotional Fighting Too Severe? DP Members Won't Be Shaken by This
- Have the Three National Convention Candidates Crossed the Line? It's Close... but They Know Each Other Very Well
- Meaning of Kim Ou-joon Broadcasting Kim Min-seok's CCTV Footage? Just Stating the Facts
- Supreme Council Member Lee Sung-yoon Should Resign From the Council if He Wants to Campaign Against a Candidate
- Preferential Voting Controversy? Decisions Should Be Made Based on Precedent Rather Than Advantages or Disadvantages
- President's Request for Deliberation on Supplementary Investigation Rights? We Will Take Appropriate Time
- Complete Abolition of Supplementary Investigation Rights? We Will Decide After Sufficient Discussion
- Time Is Needed to Listen to the Opinions of the Public and Various Professions
- Police's Inappropriate Actions in the Jang Yoon-ki Case Must Be Punished
- The Prosecution Also Tried to Cover Up the Kim Hak-ui Case in the Past
- Measures Must Be Taken Against Any Act of Hiding the Truth, Whether by the Prosecution or the Police
■ Broadcast: SBS Kim Tae-hyun's Political Show (FM 103.5 MHz 7:00 – 9:00 AM)
■ Date: July 9, 2026 (Thursday)
■ Host: Attorney Kim Tae-hyun
■ Guest: Representative Kim Young-jin, Democratic Party of Korea
[Kim Tae-hyun]: Joining us is the "Young Man" who speaks his mind, Representative Kim Young-jin of the Democratic Party of Korea. Hello, Representative.
[Kim Young-jin]: Glad to be here.
[Kim Tae-hyun]: Representative, are you taking on any role, like the preparatory committee, for the upcoming national convention?
[Kim Young-jin]: I am not running in the national convention.
[Kim Tae-hyun]: You're not running? Not even for the Supreme Council?
[Kim Young-jin]: Yes. I am not joining the preparatory committee or anything similar either.
[Kim Tae-hyun]: So you've stepped back and are watching from a distance.
[Kim Young-jin]: I am focusing on my role as the chairperson of the National Assembly's Public Administration and Security Committee.
[Kim Tae-hyun]: Representative, is the national convention going well? The reason I ask is because we've seen controversies over political legitimacy and even "grave-digging" (exhumation) in the past. Now, with only a month left until the national convention, they are fighting over the rules again. If they start fighting over rules with just a month left, they've basically gone all the way. Will this be okay?
[Kim Young-jin]: I think it just shows how fierce the primary has become.
[Kim Tae-hyun]: That's true, but it seems a bit too fierce.
[Kim Young-jin]: The Democratic Party's primary has become the most competitive one in recent times, and I believe it will lead in a good direction. Rather than a dull race, I think it is not a bad thing to have fierce debates and arguments over key issues, and through that, discuss how to achieve success for the Democratic Party and the Lee Jae-myung administration under the new leadership.
[Kim Tae-hyun]: But the issue is that they aren't clashing over big agendas like how the Democratic Party can win the next general election, the next presidential election, and maintain power, or over real estate policies. It's not even about policy issues like prosecution reform. Instead, they are arguing over who did "self-serving politics," or whether someone took cold medicine and went to sleep or not. Since they are bringing up "what did you do in the past," it feels like it's turning into an emotional mudslinging match.
[Kim Young-jin]: Yes, there is certainly that aspect. They are debating legitimacy, grave-digging, and "what did you do last summer." However, I believe they will eventually get to the core issues. Although they are currently drawing attention with various side issues, at the core, I believe the party members and the public will make their choice based on what the leader of the ruling Democratic Party of Korea will do, how they will achieve unity and victory, and whether they have the ability, attitude, and preparation to work in harmony with the Lee Jae-myung administration to build a successful government and a successful Democratic Party.
[Kim Tae-hyun]: Ultimately?
[Kim Young-jin]: That is how I see it. I don't think the Democratic Party's dues-paying members or the public will be easily shaken by such things.
[Kim Tae-hyun]: Recently, you mentioned that the three candidates—Kim Min-seok, Jung Chung-rae, and Song Young-gil—should not treat each other too harshly. From your perspective, since it's an internal party primary where they are family and comrades, there is a line that shouldn't be crossed. Do you also see all three of them crossing that line?
[Kim Young-jin]: I think they are right on the edge.
[Kim Tae-hyun]: On the edge?
[Kim Young-jin]: Yes. In fact, the three candidates—Song Young-gil, Kim Min-seok, and Jung Chung-rae—have been active in the Democratic Party for a long time, about 20 to 30 years. For over 20 years, from the 2000s to the present, they know each other extremely well regarding their political decisions, judgments, and who they did politics with during various times of political turmoil and key moments. That is why when one side talks about A, the other talks about B, and another talks about C, bringing up these side issues. But I believe they will now return to the essence.
[Kim Tae-hyun]: Who do you think is going too far?
[Kim Young-jin]: Aren't they all about the same?
[Kim Tae-hyun]: They are similar?
[Kim Young-jin]: Yes.
[Kim Tae-hyun]: The most talked-about issue recently is the "cold medicine" controversy. Representative Lee Sung-yoon, who is very close to former leader Jung Chung-rae, went as far as demanding former Prime Minister Kim Min-seok disclose the ingredients of his cold medicine, asking what he was doing on the day martial law was lifted. In fact, the phrasing and tone were even harsher than attacks from the opposition party. However, yesterday, former Prime Minister Kim Min-seok appeared on Kim Ou-joon's show to clarify this issue. The CCTV footage was not brought by Kim Min-seok himself, but was obtained and broadcast by Kim Ou-joon. The fact that this issue was resolved through an appearance on Kim Ou-joon's show has become a major talking point. As you know, Kim Ou-joon is very close to Representative Jung Chung-rae and has historically been very critical of former Prime Minister Kim Min-seok—bringing up things like his trips abroad, telling him to run for Seoul mayor, and saying things like "whether I include or exclude public opinion manipulation is up to me." How do you view this? There is a lot of public interest in how this issue was resolved through an appearance on Kim Ou-joon's show.
[Kim Young-jin]: Really? Did Kim Ou-joon cross the line? I think it was just a matter of stating objective facts. On the day of the emergency martial law on December 3, many people came in to lift the emergency martial law, including Representative Kim Min-seok. Some people were blocked at the main gate on their way, some were traveling abroad and couldn't even make it, and some didn't even receive the contact. Meanwhile, People Power Party lawmakers who were in Yeouido or the National Assembly didn't even enter the plenary chamber. Everyone acted in various ways regarding the lifting of martial law. Since martial law was lifted by many people who agreed with the Democratic Party of Korea, allowing us to maintain a normal democratic system, I think we should just leave it at that in terms of judgment.
[Kim Tae-hyun]: Yes.
[Kim Young-jin]: And basically, the leadership of the Democratic Party is supposed to act as referees. Since Lee Sung-yoon is a Supreme Council member, isn't he a referee? It is not appropriate for a referee to continuously campaign against a specific player like this. If he is going to make those kinds of remarks, it would be more appropriate for him to resign from the Supreme Council and then criticize. Those in the position of Supreme Council members, who set the rules, schedule the national convention, and manage various other things, need to proceed fairly. If they want to go beyond that, I think they should resign from the Supreme Council and speak freely outside. I think this is the first time in the history of the Democratic Party that a Supreme Council member or leadership figure has targeted a specific candidate in such a manner.
[Kim Tae-hyun]: But it was explained yesterday, and we all saw the CCTV footage. Despite that, Supreme Council Member Lee Sung-yoon has not stopped his attacks, still asking why he arrived late and what he was doing for two hours. In this situation, do you believe Supreme Council Member Lee Sung-yoon should apologize and resign from the Supreme Council?
[Kim Young-jin]: It's not about that; that is for him to decide.
[Kim Tae-hyun]: Yes, of course.
[Kim Young-jin]: It is for him to decide. However, in my 30 years of experience in the Democratic Party, I think this is the first time a Democratic Party Supreme Council member has targeted a specific candidate to this extent during a primary, whether for the party leadership or the Supreme Council.
[Kim Tae-hyun]: Indeed.
[Kim Young-jin]: So I believe they should maintain a certain level of decorum, and if they want to make such remarks, they should resign from the leadership and speak freely outside. He should resolve his own curiosity himself; the Democratic Party does not exist to satisfy Representative Lee Sung-yoon's personal curiosity.
[Kim Tae-hyun]: So you are essentially telling him to resign.
[Kim Young-jin]: I wouldn't go that far. That is for him to decide. It is a matter for his own judgment. I am just stating the general principle that the Democratic Party leadership needs to manage the election properly, in a manner befitting their leadership roles.
[Kim Tae-hyun]: This might be a bit uncomfortable for Democratic Party lawmakers to hear, but outsiders always look at whether Kim Ou-joon is exerting influence whenever a major event occurs within the Democratic Party. This time too, people are watching to see if Kim Ou-joon will influence the DP national convention. As mentioned earlier, he resolved the issue regarding former Prime Minister Kim Min-seok—with whom he didn't have a great relationship—on his own show yesterday. People are curious whether he is switching sides or stepping back, which has drawn public attention. What is your view on this?
[Kim Young-jin]: I suppose if Supreme Council Member Lee Sung-yoon keeps asking, he might get an answer as to why.
[Kim Tae-hyun]: Really?
[Kim Young-jin]: Kim Ou-joon probably made his own judgment. I don't view that YouTube channel as just a broadcast for a specific individual. Also, the majority of those running for the Supreme Council or party leadership have gone on that show to speak. Candidates for leadership often go there to present their platforms, and since many of those who watch that YouTuber are dues-paying members of the Democratic Party, they probably do it for that reason. I think it's just a routine occurrence.
[Kim Tae-hyun]: Writer Rhyu Si-min has also been speaking out quite a bit. Of course, he has the freedom of speech and expression, so he is free to talk.
[Kim Young-jin]: That's true.
[Kim Tae-hyun]: But every single word he says can, in a way, cause waves in the Democratic Party's national convention and become a major issue.
[Kim Young-jin]: Yes. Former Minister Rhyu Si-min speaks while accepting those consequences. Since he is not running as a Democratic Party candidate, nor is he on the election management committee or part of the top leadership managing the election, he certainly has that freedom of expression.
[Kim Tae-hyun]: Yes, but since he is such a "big speaker," it's bound to have an impact—whether good or bad—on the Democratic Party's national convention. As a Democratic Party lawmaker, have you ever thought that it might be better if he stayed quiet until the national convention is over?
[Kim Young-jin]: I don't think so.
[Kim Tae-hyun]: Really?
[Kim Young-jin]: Former Minister Rhyu Si-min should say what he wants to say. Since he played a major role in the process of building the Kim Dae-jung, Roh Moo-hyun, Moon Jae-in, and Lee Jae-myung administrations, I hope he speaks in a way that points toward a good path.
[Kim Tae-hyun]: Yes.
[Kim Young-jin]: Since Minister Rhyu is not running as a candidate himself, I hope his remarks lead the Democratic Party's national convention in a positive direction rather than causing more confusion.
[Kim Tae-hyun]: Former leader Jung Chung-rae and former Prime Minister Kim Min-seok are accusing each other of doing more "self-serving politics." They are saying, "The ruling party leader should support the president, so why are you doing self-serving politics?" That is how they are addressing each other.
[Kim Young-jin]: Yes.
[Kim Tae-hyun]: From your perspective, who does more self-serving politics?
[Kim Young-jin]: Everyone does self-serving politics.
[Kim Tae-hyun]: True.
[Kim Young-jin]: Even I, Kim Young-jin, am doing self-serving politics by appearing on "Kim Tae-hyun's Political Show." However, whether that falls within an acceptable range given that person's position and role is something that I believe the party members, the public, and the media will judge. So, making a quantitative assessment of who did more or less self-serving politics is not easy.
[Kim Tae-hyun]: Understood. We've gone from the controversy over past history to the current dispute over the national convention rules. There is the preferential voting system (where voters rank all candidates in order of preference). Since we've always had a runoff voting system (where a second round of voting is held for the top candidates), outsiders like us assumed we would proceed with that. But suddenly, one day, there's talk of changing the rules to a preferential voting system. Then, because one side opposed it, they said they wouldn't change it. What is going on here? Is the preferential voting system itself a violation of the party constitution and regulations?
[Kim Young-jin]: Actually, the Democratic Party has used preferential voting to decide the candidate on the same day when there are multiple candidates, meaning two or more. The difference lies in whether the runoff takes the form of narrowing it down to two candidates and voting again, or, when there are three candidates, marking first, second, and third preferences, and if the first or second-place candidate does not secure a majority, redistributing the votes of the third-place candidate based on the second preferences to reach a majority.
[Kim Tae-hyun]: Yes.
[Kim Young-jin]: So, whether to hold a revote or use preferential voting for the runoff is a matter of choice. In the past, even for the 2025 party leader election, it was decided that a preferential voting system would be used if there were three or more candidates. We also proceed this way when electing the floor leader and the speaker, and we did the same when electing the chairperson of the Gyeonggi Provincial Party Committee.
[Kim Tae-hyun]: Yes.
[Kim Young-jin]: In short, when electing the floor leader or the speaker, if there are three or more candidates, it cannot be decided on the same day. If it were just 161 lawmakers voting, we could do it immediately, but we have 1.5 million dues-paying members who need to vote. Realistically, that is impossible. To overcome this impossibility and make a decision on the same day, the preferential voting system was introduced, and the same goes for the party leader and Supreme Council member elections. Therefore, since the Democratic Party has precedents of using the preferential voting system to achieve the effect of a runoff, we should decide based on those precedents. I don't think this is an issue that should be debated based on who benefits or loses.
[Kim Tae-hyun]: So what happens next? I heard they are discussing it again today.
[Kim Young-jin]: The National Convention Preparation Committee and the Supreme Council will make that decision. In short, since it was introduced and used in past Supreme Council and party leader elections, as well as in electing the floor leader, speaker, and provincial party chairpersons, I expect they will proceed in accordance with those precedents.
[Kim Tae-hyun]: Understood. Representative, regarding the abolition of the supplementary investigation rights. The President clearly stated his position: rather than complete abolition, it is much better to leave them in a limited capacity for the sake of the victims. However, he said he cannot do as he pleases, so he asked the National Assembly to deliberate carefully. Yet, the word is that they are going to wrap this up with complete abolition before the national convention. Putting aside the fact that the conclusion differs from the President's wishes, was there actually any of the "deliberation" that the President requested from the party? It seems to be getting wrapped up too quickly. I understood the "deliberation" the President spoke of as discussing it to prevent side effects and taking it slow. But since they are rushing to finish it before the national convention, I wonder if there was any real deliberation at all.
[Kim Young-jin]: It has been proposed and is being discussed in the Legislation and Judiciary Committee. Since the party also said it would propose a consolidated bill, I believe there will be time to discuss it over a period of time.
[Kim Tae-hyun]: But they say they are going to finish it before the national convention.
[Kim Young-jin]: I believe we will take appropriate time to discuss it in the Legislation and Judiciary Committee, talk about it in the general meeting of lawmakers, and listen to public opinion. I don't think they will rush through it that easily.
[Kim Tae-hyun]: Then is there a possibility that something might be left in place, in line with the President's wishes?
[Kim Young-jin]: Since there are various processes involved, we should watch the course of the discussions. Currently, Floor Leader Han Byung-do is managing the discussions well to gather the opinions of lawmakers. Since this is an issue of changing the overall criminal justice system, I think time is needed to listen to expert opinions and conduct thorough discussions. I believe the leadership will handle it that way.
[Kim Tae-hyun]: What are your thoughts, Representative? Are you also for complete abolition, or do you think it is better to keep them?
[Kim Young-jin]: I also believe we need to discuss it thoroughly.
[Kim Tae-hyun]: So complete abolition could be a bit risky?
[Kim Young-jin]: There are various opinions. Rather than sharing my personal opinion right now, I think we should listen to others. I believe we need a process to hear from various people in the field—such as those in the field of law, lawyers, Minbyun (Lawyers for a Democratic Society), the Korean Bar Association, active prosecutors, and active police—as well as the public, who are the legal consumers dealing with the criminal justice system.
[Kim Tae-hyun]: Then, there are lawmakers in the Legislation and Judiciary Committee who strongly advocate for the complete abolition of supplementary investigation rights. Are you saying that complete abolition is not 100% guaranteed to happen exactly as those lawmakers want?
[Kim Young-jin]: Since it is not a decided matter yet, I believe a process of discussion is necessary.
[Kim Tae-hyun]: I can understand that as there being a possibility of modification.
[Kim Young-jin]: I am not sure about that, but in any case, I believe a process of discussion is necessary.
[Kim Tae-hyun]: Representative, you are the chairperson of the Public Administration and Security Committee. The Ministry of the Interior and Safety is under your jurisdiction, which means the police are also under your jurisdiction. Will the police be okay regarding the Jang Yoon-ki case?
[Kim Young-jin]: Regarding the Jang Yoon-ki case, as the acting commissioner general of the National Police Agency mentioned and apologized for, I believe we must firmly inspect and punish the acts of destroying and hiding evidence during the investigation and up until the request for prosecution, to ensure such actions never happen again.
[Kim Tae-hyun]: Yes.
[Kim Young-jin]: From the perspective of the high school girl who was the victim, this can be seen as an enormously wrong act. And indeed, it was wrong. The occurrence of such incidents is a major failure in police history. The Public Administration and Security Committee must firmly hold them accountable and ensure this never happens again. I believe our public will not tolerate such actions occurring, whether in the police or the prosecution.
[Kim Tae-hyun]: Yes.
[Kim Young-jin]: In short, even the prosecution went through controversies, making numerous statements to cover up the case of Vice Minister Kim Hak-ui, and the facts were eventually uncovered through a reinvestigation process. Whether it is the prosecution or the police, I believe firm measures must be taken within the boundaries allowed by law and system against any acts of hiding the truth of a case and violating the human rights of the public.
[Kim Tae-hyun]: Understood. We will end here. That was Representative Kim Young-jin of the Democratic Party of Korea. Thank you.
[Kim Young-jin]: Thank you.
The copyright of this interview material belongs to SBS Radio.
When publishing the full text or quoting this interview, please specify the channel name and the exact program name as follows:
[SBS Kim Tae-hyun's Political Show]
※
Copying, redistribution, and unauthorized use in AI training are strictly prohibited.