Rep. Na Kyung-won: "President Lee Asking AI? Pathetic... When I Asked, It Said 'Unconstitutional'"

- Asking AI about 'cannot attend' and calling it far-fetched? Citing AI is pathetic
- When I asked, it said grounds for impeachment... Lee seems to have led AI to desired answer
- Sharing state affairs agenda? Just go through Ministers of Justice and the Interior
- Head of Serious Crime Investigation Office taking dictation; this will lead to investigations tailored only to Lee's liking
- Lee obsessed with social media to appeal due to pressure from his own trials
- Luncheon is fine, but calling North Korea's nuclear weapons "defensive"? Kim's spokesperson
- People Power Party approval rating? Public beginning to sense ruling party's arrogance
- PPP members working hard, must constantly innovate
- Reason for doing politics? Leading general election victory and changing government is my role
- Recording controversy? Must not amplify conflict... Jang should clarify position

■ Broadcast: SBS Kim Tae-hyun's Political Show (FM 103.5 MHz 7:00 – 9:00 AM)
■ Date: October 22, 2026 (Thursday)
■ Host: Attorney Kim Tae-hyun
■ Guest: Rep. Na Kyung-won, People Power Party

[Kim Tae-hyun]: We meet every other week. We are joined by Representative Na Kyung-won, a five-term veteran lawmaker of the People Power Party. Welcome, Representative.

[Na Kyung-won]: Hello.

[Kim Tae-hyun]: Representative, as we promised two weeks ago, we changed our background music to "Na-Na-Na." Chaeyeon's "Na Na-Na-Na-Sswa~," that one. We're going to search for every song. Any song that features "Na." We've already found a lot of them.

[Na Kyung-won]: Are you going to rotate through them?

[Kim Tae-hyun]: Of course. We'll rotate through all of them and eventually settle on the one you like best. One of the biggest news stories yesterday was the President and Gemini. Regarding whether it is legal for the heads of the Public Prosecution Office and the Serious Crime Investigation Office to attend cabinet meetings, the President wrote a post on social media yesterday titled, "I asked Gemini. The conclusion is that the claim they cannot attend cabinet meetings is an unconstitutional pretense." That was the post.

[Na Kyung-won]: Isn't it so pathetic that I cannot even call it amusing? Has the President been asking Gemini how to run state affairs all this time? You know, did he ask AI about ETFs, real estate, and everything else all along? It's really so pathetic. So I also ran a prompt myself.

[Kim Tae-hyun]: I heard you did. What exactly did you write in your question?

[Na Kyung-won]: What else would I write? Just whether it is appropriate to attend or not. Because these are quasi-judicial functions, that is naturally the answer that comes out. It is appropriate not to attend cabinet meetings. Because doing so infringes on constitutional values, the separation of powers, political independence, and independence in investigations—infringing on such constitutional values. Should I read it verbatim? "Referring to the Government Organization Act or the President's command authority in general administration regarding this matter is not only inappropriate, but also infringes on constitutional values." So in the end, it concluded by answering that doing so "also constitutes grounds for impeachment."

[Kim Tae-hyun]: Gemini said that, Representative?

[Na Kyung-won]: Yes. As you know, Gemini and other AI tools tailor their answers to the orientation of the person asking questions.

[Kim Tae-hyun]: People do say that.

[Na Kyung-won]: How on earth did the President phrase his question to get an answer like that?

[Kim Tae-hyun]: So what you are saying is that when you simply entered "is it appropriate to attend?", it said no because they are quasi-judicial agencies and require political neutrality.

[Na Kyung-won]: Should I write it just as it is? Isn't this obvious? Throughout our constitutional history, why would our past administrations never have had the Prosecutor General and the Commissioner General of the National Police Agency sit in on cabinet meetings? Not once in our history. Yet starting around late last year, they began subtly having them sit in.

[Kim Tae-hyun]: Then in your view, Representative, did the President frame his question specifically to elicit the answer that "this is not unconstitutional"?

[Na Kyung-won]: I certainly believe that was the case.

[Kim Tae-hyun]: Can you guess what he might have written?

[Na Kyung-won]: He probably brought up the Government Organization Act and the like to induce such an answer.

[Kim Tae-hyun]: Ah, in that manner? But the President argues this: "Just as operational independence is important, it is necessary for those two agencies to have democratic control and share the direction of state affairs. Treating investigative agencies as special bodies and giving them special treatment when they are external agencies like any other is a misguided convention." That is what he claimed.

[Na Kyung-won]: Regarding democratic control, control over investigative agencies is exercised by the courts. It is controlled through the National Assembly's legislative authority and through its budget deliberation authority. Saying he will control them through the status of the President—what does that mean? Closed-door extraterritoriality? I see this as dragging investigations right into the middle of politics. Isn't that something the public understands through common sense? Why must investigations be independent?

[Kim Tae-hyun]: Neutrality.

[Na Kyung-won]: Exactly, why must they be independent and neutral? Because they infringe on our most fundamental rights—physical liberty, freedoms, and rights. Therefore, what must they be conducted in accordance with? In accordance with the law and evidence. Placing that under the direction and command of the President is inappropriate. In other words, applying the President's general administrative command authority to quasi-judicial functions like investigation and indictment infringes on constitutional values—that is how I see it.

[Kim Tae-hyun]: Past administrations, whether the Yoon Suk-yeol administration or the Moon Jae-in administration, almost never had prosecutors general sit in on cabinet meetings.

[Na Kyung-won]: They never had them sit in on a regular basis.

[Kim Tae-hyun]: They might have been there when specifically needed, but there was no regular attendance.

[Na Kyung-won]: Look at the case of the Prosecutor General. Under the Prosecutors' Office Act, even the Minister of Justice's command over the Prosecutor General cannot apply to general cases, but only to specific cases through the Prosecutor General. Because it is accepted that investigations must strictly follow the law and evidence, general command authority is not exercised.

[Kim Tae-hyun]: Yet the President even shared an amusing AI response while telling the heads of the Serious Crime Investigation Office and the Public Prosecution Office to attend cabinet meetings, share the direction of state affairs, and receive democratic control. Do you believe the President has other motives?

[Na Kyung-won]: What happens if they meet repeatedly? Yesterday, the head of the Serious Crime Investigation Office was seen taking dictation. Won't that lead to dictation-style investigations? And what happens when investigations are dictated? In the end, they will only conduct investigations that suit the President's taste. Sharing statecraft philosophy and sharing the direction of state affairs can be done according to established procedures. That statecraft philosophy just needs to be shared through the Minister of Justice and the Minister of the Interior and Safety. Why must they sit in on cabinet meetings?

[Kim Tae-hyun]: Understood. And yesterday the President spoke a lot on social media regarding communication issues. He stated, "I will increase live broadcasts of state affairs, media contact, on-site visits, and social media." How do you evaluate the President's communication style, along with his mindset and willingness to communicate?

[Na Kyung-won]: If it were truly a willingness to communicate, that would be good. But if it is used as a means to force his unilateral thoughts and promote himself rather than communicate, that cannot be seen as communication. As you know, I have heard that quite a few citizens have had their accounts blocked by the President. I have heard many stories about the President going on social media to reply or do whatever.

[Kim Tae-hyun]: Yes.

[Na Kyung-won]: Ultimately, communication requires listening to what others have to say, but it basically appears to be an attempt to promote and impose his own views.

[Kim Tae-hyun]: Yes.

[Na Kyung-won]: Second, looking at the timing of his communications: he does it in the middle of the night, at dawn, and even while on overseas tours. It makes me worry about when on earth he seriously deliberates and ponders state affairs. Looking at the sheer numbers and frequency, isn't this a bit excessive? So I wonder why the President is so obsessed. It seems like he stepped up personally thinking, "I can't trust anyone else with this," but this feels like there is some pressure.

[Kim Tae-hyun]: Pressure? What kind of pressure?

[Na Kyung-won]: In the end, I suspect that pressure regarding his own trials is manifesting in this way.

[Kim Tae-hyun]: Are you saying that pressure and stress over his so-called judicial risks are being expressed through social media like this?

[Na Kyung-won]: Because he feels such pressure, he seems to have an overwhelming urge that he must stay popular and continuously appeal to the public through such communication. Should the office of the President be used in such a manner? Yesterday, when he said he asked Gemini, I felt the level of the President of the Republic of Korea was truly pathetic. And seeing him insist on pushing social media, I even felt that our country might be cheapened by this.

[Kim Tae-hyun]: Recently, the President came down unannounced to have a meal with reporters covering the presidential office and held an unannounced press conference for about an hour and a half. How did you view that? Was there any remark that caught your ear?

[Na Kyung-won]: Eating a meal together is fine. But what did he say there? Didn't he say that North Korea's nuclear weapons are for defensive purposes? We were already talking about the breakdown of alliances, and now he claims North Korea's nuclear arsenal is defensive. Is he really the President of the Republic of Korea? He is not Kim Jong-un's spokesperson. North Korea stated itself in its 2022 Nuclear Forces Policy Law that it could launch preemptive nuclear strikes, and specified in its constitution that it is a nuclear-armed state. Yet he claims, "This is defensive, they will never attack." Who would welcome such words? Why say something like this? Just the other day, our soldiers suffered ankle injuries and amputations from landmines, and he went to the UN calling for the lifting of sanctions against North Korea. Hearing the President say that North Korea's nuclear weapons are for defensive purposes literally kept me awake at night. Which country's president is he?

[Kim Tae-hyun]: Two weeks ago when you appeared, Representative, you also expressed great concern over our country's diplomatic and security situation, having previously served as chair of the Foreign Affairs and Unification Committee. Two weeks have passed. Has the situation improved, or worsened?

[Na Kyung-won]: How could it improve? It has worsened. Look at this. Before even addressing alliances, the President made such remarks, and Minister Chung Dong-young said regarding things like landmine provocations that "they cannot be seen as being for offensive purposes by North Korea." So Kim Yo-jong immediately came out—what did she say? Now the roles are completely reversed. They speak as if we are the ones trespassing, doing inspections or patrols, so where is this country headed? On top of that, regarding North Korea, we used to be invited every year as an observer country to US-Japan joint military exercises, but weren't we completely left out recently? We didn't even get an invitation. Other countries that observed together became "participating countries." The moment I saw that, I thought: isn't this a "new Acheson Line"? The US-Japan joint military exercises took place above the old Acheson Line, and after the Acheson Line was drawn, didn't the Korean War break out? It feels like the security alliance is virtually on the brink of collapse.

[Kim Tae-hyun]: Representative, let me ask a few questions about internal party matters. Recent polls have looked good. Realmeter shows party support ahead of the Democratic Party, and Gallup Korea shows support for the ruling party in the next general election is higher than support for the opposition. If the general election were held today, the People Power Party would win. (*Commissioned by Asia Economy, surveyed by Realmeter via wireless ARS from October 15 to 16. Democratic Party 36.2%, People Power Party 40.9%. For details, refer to the National Election Survey Deliberation Commission website.) If we go by those polls and vote today, is the poll rating good because the party leadership is running things well and voters see the PPP as an alternative, or is it a windfall benefit from the Democratic Party's mistakes?

[Na Kyung-won]: You are asking a very leading question.

[Kim Tae-hyun]: That's what the survey showed anyway.

[Na Kyung-won]: In any case, all members of our party are doing their utmost. As you can see in the parliamentary audits, regardless of the standing committee, we are doing our best to uncover and point out the misgovernance of the Lee Jae-myung administration, just as we have done all along. All members are doing their utmost. But in addition to that...

[Kim Tae-hyun]: In addition, what else?

[Na Kyung-won]: In addition, the public is tangibly feeling that the arrogance, hypocrisy, and incompetence of the Democratic Party and the Lee Jae-myung administration have reached an extreme. It has become palpable. Market failures in real estate and stocks need no further explanation. From real estate, stocks, and appointment fiascoes to the breakdown of alliances, the whole picture is truly hard to believe. On top of that, look at recent events: starting from Governor Choo Mi-ae's "straw" remark, to Representative Kim Min-seok going to firefighters at dawn to discuss power harassment, to improperly parking in emergency vehicle spots when attending a memorial service. And Jeju Airport was brought to a complete standstill just to fly the presidential plane. This is truly the height of arrogance. The fact that they do not fear the people has begun to be felt directly by the public. I believe that is the biggest factor.

[Kim Tae-hyun]: Representative, isn't there one thing you wish for? If our party could just change this one thing, we could go on to win a major victory in the next general election—what is that one missing piece?

[Na Kyung-won]: From now on is what matters. What we do from this point forward is truly maximizing our capabilities. Everyone says they are working hard, but gathering all those efforts to maximize our capabilities is crucial. Next, as you know, we must repeatedly articulate our vision for the Republic of Korea. While we are doing that now, it is not widely known yet, so we must also acknowledge our mistakes. I always believe that reform begins with humbling oneself.

[Kim Tae-hyun]: When a new leadership is formed at the national convention next year, does that leadership need to center on change and innovation?

[Na Kyung-won]: Naturally, we must always innovate. Shouldn't we always be innovating?

[Kim Tae-hyun]: Representative, do you have plans to take on any specific role?

[Na Kyung-won]: I always have the intention to work hard in whatever role I may take. I think about this a lot lately. I have been in politics for a long time. When I reflect on why I started politics, leading a victory in the next general election and bringing about a change of government is my role. I feel that if we hand power over to the Lee Jae-myung administration and the Democratic Party administration again, the country will be ruined.

[Kim Tae-hyun]: Understood. Yesterday, however, a couple of YouTube channels disclosed a recording of Representative Jang Dong-hyeok having drinks and dining privately with a political commentator during last year's national convention. Did you listen to it?

[Na Kyung-won]: I couldn't listen closely. I don't like listening to such recordings. I only read about it in articles.

[Kim Tae-hyun]: It reportedly contained a lot of profanity, and statements indicating he doesn't really believe in election fraud claims. There has been a lot of talk since that recording was released. What is your view?

[Na Kyung-won]: In any case, the weight of political leaders' words is very heavy. In that sense, if there were rough expressions, I expect the party leader will express his position appropriately.

[Kim Tae-hyun]: Yes.

[Na Kyung-won]: Rather than calling it interesting, I wonder why this recording from a year ago was disclosed now. Moreover, they say the recording was not made legitimately, but recorded secretly. It is undesirable for secretly recorded materials to circulate frequently like this and amplify internal conflicts within the party. Therefore, I think the party leader will likely state an appropriate position.

[Kim Tae-hyun]: Understood. We will wrap up here. We were joined by Representative Na Kyung-won of the People Power Party. Thank you.

[Na Kyung-won]: Thank you.

The copyright of this interview material belongs to SBS Radio.
When publishing the full text or citing this interview in reports,
please specify the channel and exact program name as shown below.

[SBS Kim Tae-hyun's Political Show]


※ Please note: This article was translated by AI and may contain errors.