KOR- He officiated Kim Hyun-ji's wedding... likely holds strong sway over personnel decisions
- Chung Dong-young refuses to recognize DMZ landmine as an "attack"... eroding trust
- Unfit as unification minister... Chung Dong-young must step down
- NIS Director Lee Jong-suk's rejection by U.S. intelligence agencies was only natural
- Viewed as holding a stance entirely at odds with U.S. strategy on China
- South Korea-U.S. ties at their worst after Coupang incident... Lee Jong-suk must also be replaced
- Defense Minister Kang Shin-chul is also dangerous... far too romantic regarding North Korea sanctions
- Landmine detonation was a deceptive show... must resume training for the decapitation of Kim Jong-un
- Lee Jae-myung faces a dilemma as Lee Hwa-young demands parole
- Supreme Court justice appointment issue? The presidential office must submit it to the National Assembly in accordance with the Constitution
■ Broadcast: SBS Kim Tae-hyun's Political Show (FM 103.5 MHz 7:00 – 9:00 AM)
■ Date: Thursday, October 8, 2026
■ Host: Attorney Kim Tae-hyun
■ Guest: Na Kyung-won, People Power Party Lawmaker
▷ Kim Tae-hyun: If the Democratic Party has the outspoken, sharp-minded lawmaker Kim Young-jin, the People Power Party has this person. Starting today, we will meet biweekly on Thursdays with five-term veteran lawmaker Na Kyung-won of the People Power Party. Lawmaker Na, hello.
▶ Na Kyung-won: Hello.
▷ Kim Tae-hyun: Lawmaker Na, did you like the music? "Na Na Na, come on." It is a famous song.
▶ Na Kyung-won: (Laughs) Really? Actually, I didn't hear the music.
▷ Kim Tae-hyun: You should listen to it. It is very good.
▶ Na Kyung-won: I like songs like that. "Nan na-na-na, nan-nan-na-na-na-na na."
▷ Kim Tae-hyun: Shall we play that for you?
▶ Na Kyung-won: (Laughs) No, it's fine.
▷ Kim Tae-hyun: If you'd like, next time we can switch it to Chae Yeon's "Nan Na-na-na Swa~." That would be great for us. Lawmaker Na, right now the parliamentary audit is very important for the main opposition People Power Party. Let's look at this first. You serve on the Climate, Energy, Environment, and Labor Committee. Regarding the president of the Korea District Heating Corporation...
▶ Na Kyung-won: I received the data from my office and released it.
▷ Kim Tae-hyun: I watched that yesterday as well. What do you see as the biggest problem here?
▶ Na Kyung-won: Look at this. Ranked 8th out of 8 applicants in the document screening, and 5th out of 5 in the interview.
▷ Kim Tae-hyun: That means failing marks.
▶ Na Kyung-won: Yet the minister claims it was a sole recommendation. They say that multiple candidates were recommended and it was left to discretion. While we recognize discretion to some degree, this has gone too far. Looking at this individual's career and background, he could be called a habitual protester who mainly engaged in demonstrations. But the crux of the matter is that he officiated Chief Kim Hyun-ji's wedding.
▷ Kim Tae-hyun: That is what has been reported.
▶ Na Kyung-won: So the only interpretation we can make is that it's because he officiated the wedding. How can we not raise an issue with that?
▷ Kim Tae-hyun: But yesterday, Minister Kim Sung-whan answered, "The role of the Korea District Heating Corporation is changing significantly. We must consider not only energy, but also various environmental and ecological factors." How do you interpret this?
▶ Na Kyung-won: Claiming the environment is important was just an absurd excuse. Yesterday, after the minister gave that answer and I criticized it right away, another Democratic Party lawmaker spoke up, and yesterday the Democratic Party even issued a commentary. It only makes me think, "Chief Hyun-ji is indeed powerful." We will see. The president of the Korea District Heating Corporation will probably have to appear before our parliamentary audit as an agency witness, so let's see what kind of person he is.
▷ Kim Tae-hyun: So you believe he was appointed president because of his personal connections to Chief Kim Hyun-ji?
▶ Na Kyung-won: Of course. But what matters are the reactions that followed. Seeing everyone rush to shield this without choice only reinforces the thought that Chief Hyun-ji is truly powerful. Before that, I posed it like a quiz: "'Between person A and person B, who is qualified?' Naturally, people chose A, but B got the job. The key factor behind B was Kim Hyun-ji." That is what I wrote.
▷ Kim Tae-hyun: Chief Kim Hyun-ji probably won't appear as a witness for the audit, right?
▶ Na Kyung-won: She probably won't. The crux is that we need to examine how much influence Chief Kim Hyun-ji exerts over all current appointments, policies, and decision-making processes, but they are shielding her completely.
▷ Kim Tae-hyun: Understood.
▶ Na Kyung-won: Nothing in the National Assembly goes as we wish.
▷ Kim Tae-hyun: Let's turn to foreign affairs and security. Regarding the DMZ incident, Unification Minister Chung Dong-young said yesterday, "We cannot define this landmine explosion as an attack." How do you view Minister Chung Dong-young's perception of this incident?
▶ Na Kyung-won: This government's perception is the problem. First, as soon as the landmine explosion occurred, they dragged their feet without acknowledging two things: that it belonged to North Korea, and that it was deliberately planted. Only after eight days did they finally acknowledge it. In the meantime, what did the president do at the United Nations? He called for lifting sanctions on North Korea. He was like Kim Jong-un's top spokesperson, saying what Kim Jong-un wanted. Then, because they had no choice, they admitted those two facts. If a North Korean landmine was buried south of our Military Demarcation Line (MDL), what is that if not an attack? Is this just an accident too? Until the end yesterday, they kept referring to it only as an accident.
▷ Kim Tae-hyun: Minister Chung did?
▶ Na Kyung-won: Yes. And the president called it an unfortunate accident. Looking at Minister Chung Dong-young's remarks, this ultimately damages the credibility of the Republic of Korea. It is inappropriate for a unification minister to speak like that. I believe both Minister Chung Dong-young and NIS Director Lee Jong-suk are very serious problems right now. If Minister Chung Dong-young, who continues to refuse to acknowledge North Korea's attack, remains in that post, doesn't that punch a huge hole in South Korea's security?
▷ Kim Tae-hyun: Yes.
▶ Na Kyung-won: In March, Minister Chung Dong-young also made remarks regarding Guseong that revealed information that should never have been made public. Ever since, intelligence sharing between the United States and us has stalled. Looking at all this, he is someone who should not be in that position. The unification minister is a role that naturally receives substantial intelligence and serves as a member of the National Security Council. Yet looking at his perception of the North Korean landmine yesterday and his past Guseong remarks, Minister Chung Dong-young's presence in that position poses a great danger to South Korea's national security. Therefore, I believe it is right for Minister Chung Dong-young to step down now.
▷ Kim Tae-hyun: Due to the nature of the ministry, the Ministry of Unification is bound to lean dovish. Even taking that into account, is it Minister Chung's personal character, or perhaps his personal convictions?
▶ Na Kyung-won: That is precisely the problem with this administration's ministers. Minister Kim Sung-whan came out talking about his personal convictions and philosophy while criticizing the Four Major Rivers Project, but in carrying out the Honam mega-project, they cannot avoid benefiting from the Four Major Rivers Project.
▷ Kim Tae-hyun: Yes.
▶ Na Kyung-won: Furthermore, while Minister Chung Dong-young speaks of his convictions, a minister is not there to express personal convictions; they are there to carry out the duties of the unification minister and establish South Korea's unification policy. Yet he talks about intelligence sharing with the U.S. like that, and while discussing unification, he once said, "Unification is violent language." I believe Minister Chung Dong-young, who refused to the very end yesterday to call it a North Korean attack, should step down immediately.
▷ Kim Tae-hyun: You mentioned two people who you believe are harming our national security: Unification Minister Chung Dong-young and NIS Director Lee Jong-suk. Coincidentally, this morning both Chosun Ilbo and Dong-A Ilbo ran exclusive front-page stories on Director Lee Jong-suk. The Chosun Ilbo exclusive lead article reads: "U.S. Refuses NIS Director's Visit to North Korea Surveillance Agency; Lee Jong-suk's Observation of National Geospatial-Intelligence Agency Tracking Kim Jong-un via Satellite Falls Through." And the Dong-A Ilbo exclusive, also front-page top: "U.S. Refused NIS Participation in Meeting on Countering North Korean Hacking; U.S. Requested Exclusion of NIS at June Working-Level Meeting of Diplomatic and Intelligence Authorities, First Absence." The tone of both papers indicates that the U.S., particularly the CIA, feels uncomfortable with NIS Director Lee Jong-suk, viewing him as perhaps too close to China.
▶ Na Kyung-won: It is inevitable. In reality, Director Lee's perspective is completely different from the U.S. stance on responding to China. Director Lee is someone who even mentioned security cooperation with China. From the U.S. perspective, South Korea, the U.S., and Japan need to coordinate together to respond to China, yet in 2021 he mentioned security cooperation with China, and he opposed the GSOMIA (General Security of Military Information Agreement) and the THAAD deployment. He took a stance that the GSOMIA agreement should be postponed.
▷ Kim Tae-hyun: Yes.
▶ Na Kyung-won: After all, the GSOMIA agreement is one of the fundamental starting points for trilateral intelligence sharing among South Korea, the U.S., and Japan. So he holds a position completely contrary to the U.S. strategy on China, and that is why his planned visit to the U.S. in March fell through. Now, regarding the U.S. meetings on responding to North Korean hacking and threats, the U.S. feels it cannot even share intelligence with South Korea's core security leadership, wondering if it might leak to China or North Korea. Isn't that how they perceive it?
▷ Kim Tae-hyun: Yes.
▶ Na Kyung-won: I truly believe that South Korea-U.S. relations couldn't be worse than they are right now.
▷ Kim Tae-hyun: At present.
▶ Na Kyung-won: Strained South Korea-U.S. relations do not stop at security; they affect the economy as well. This administration's policy direction is symbolized by these key figures. No matter how much lip service they pay about South Korea-U.S. relations being good or valuing the alliance, as long as Director Lee Jong-suk and Minister Chung Dong-young remain in those positions, South Korea-U.S. ties will only deteriorate further.
▷ Kim Tae-hyun: Setting aside right or wrong, if South Korea-U.S. relations are stumbling right now, the issue needs to be resolved. If these reports are true, a breakdown in intelligence sharing between the NIS and the CIA harms our security. If true, are you saying the government's countermeasure should be to replace both of them?
▶ Na Kyung-won: I believe replacing both of them is the right course. In fact, beyond these two individuals, there have been multiple signals from the U.S. issuing warnings and expressing concern over bilateral ties, but the government has publicly ignored them or gone in the opposite direction. Take the Coupang issue, for example. It is true that Coupang handled things clumsily, running counter to public sentiment. However, there is a stark contrast between holding Coupang accountable for data leaks and the government's response to AliExpress, which recently concealed hacking for four months. Such actions have convinced the U.S. that we are subjecting Coupang to discriminatory and unfair treatment. As a result, major alarm bells are ringing across security and trade.
▷ Kim Tae-hyun: Yes.
▶ Na Kyung-won: In that case, what we must do—especially regarding Director Lee Jong-suk and Minister Chung Dong-young—is recognize that this is not merely about signaling our stance to the United States. Having these two in office poses a substantial danger to our national security. Therefore, I believe neither should remain in their posts any longer.
▷ Kim Tae-hyun: Lawmaker Na, something just occurred to me. You previously served on the Foreign Affairs and Unification Committee.
▶ Na Kyung-won: I was the committee chair.
▷ Kim Tae-hyun: Yes, you were the chair. Looking at the Foreign Affairs and Unification Committee recently, when Lawmaker Han Dong-hoon questioned the denial of Director Lee Jong-suk's visit...
▶ Na Kyung-won: He said a visa was denied, right?
▷ Kim Tae-hyun: He asked, "Is it true the visa was denied? That is my understanding." Foreign Minister Cho Hyun answered that as far as he knows, that is not the case.
▶ Na Kyung-won: It appears the visa was not denied; rather, the visit was rejected because the schedule could not be coordinated. So it does not appear to be a visa issue.
▷ Kim Tae-hyun: Because of the itinerary?
▶ Na Kyung-won: Yes. So the foreign minister was not incorrect.
▷ Kim Tae-hyun: I see. Regarding sanctions against North Korea: something had to be done in response to the landmine incident, corresponding measures needed to be taken. Minister Kang Shin-chul said that North Korea was flustered by our measures and delayed its statement by a day.
▶ Na Kyung-won: In my view, another dangerous person is the defense minister.
▷ Kim Tae-hyun: Why?
▶ Na Kyung-won: He seems far too romantic. A romantic person should not serve as defense minister. In truth, they simply detonated the landmine and called it a day. Isn't that destroying evidence? North Korea is likely to change its tune later, yet they call detonating it a response. I felt this was nothing more than a deceptive show put on for the public.
▷ Kim Tae-hyun: Yes.
▶ Na Kyung-won: What should be done right now? Our soldier was injured due to North Korea's provocation and territorial invasion. A service member's ankle was severed. Then corresponding measures must be taken. Yet they think everything is resolved simply because they blew up the landmine North Korea planted? How can anyone be so complacent? Minister Chung Dong-young defends North Korea like its spokesperson, claiming it wasn't an attack, and Minister Kang thinks it's over because they blew it up? I believe all available measures must be taken. We must maximize sanctions on North Korea, including financial sanctions, and what matters most is military action. Beyond loudspeakers and leaflets, we must resume training for the decapitation of Kim Jong-un, as stipulated in OPLAN 5015, the military operational plan signed between South Korea and the U.S. in 2015. We must show them: "If you harm our soldiers to this extent, this is the punishment you will receive." Believing we have responded fully just because we cleared the mine? It is pathetic. I can only describe it as pathetic.
▷ Kim Tae-hyun: Let's turn to another topic. Breaking news came out yesterday afternoon that former Gyeonggi Province Vice Governor for Peace Lee Hwa-young's defense attorney said Lee was furious with President Lee Jae-myung and demanded parole. He claimed it was a fabricated case, asking why he wasn't being released. Regarding this, you remarked that "the president is trapped in a dilemma." What did you mean by that?
▶ Na Kyung-won: From Vice Governor Lee Hwa-young's perspective, he must be seething. Why is he the only one still in prison? They claimed he was innocent and that this wasn't true. So releasing him poses a problem, yet not releasing him leaves the president fearful of what Lee might reveal.
▷ Kim Tae-hyun: Releasing him could also become a political burden for the president.
▶ Na Kyung-won: Exactly. So the president is in a true dilemma.
▷ Kim Tae-hyun: Why do you think former Vice Governor Lee Hwa-young is acting this way?
▶ Na Kyung-won: He feels it's unfair. He is the only one locked up. He must be thinking, "Why is everyone else, like Kim Yong, out and about freely while I am the only one behind bars? After all the shielding I did for them?" That is likely his mindset.
▷ Kim Tae-hyun: Ultimately, whether you call it a demand to the president or not, it won't be easy to grant, will it?
▶ Na Kyung-won: It won't be easy. It won't be easy, but haven't they pulled all sorts of stunts so far, starting from the salmon sashimi and liquor party? They have tried everything. While it won't be easy, it will remain a ticking time bomb.
▷ Kim Tae-hyun: Lawmaker Na, your previous standing committee was the Legislation and Judiciary Committee. A Supreme Court justice seat is currently vacant, and Chief Justice Cho Hee-dae and the presidential office continue to hold firmly to their respective positions. How should this deadlock be resolved?
▶ Na Kyung-won: I believe we should simply follow the Constitution and the law. The presidential office should swiftly send the nomination to the National Assembly for a confirmation hearing.
▷ Kim Tae-hyun: Rather than holding onto it?
▶ Na Kyung-won: Yes, they must do so, or things will remain deadlocked. Chief Justice Cho Hee-dae views this as a significant infringement on judicial independence, and since disrespecting the National Assembly has already begun, shouldn't at least that be protected? That is why I believe following the Constitution and the law is the only way forward.
▷ Kim Tae-hyun: In other words, send it to a confirmation hearing, and if it is rejected there, form another recommendation committee and submit a new recommendation in accordance with procedure.
▶ Na Kyung-won: Exactly. That is the proper procedure. But for the presidential office to refuse outright to send it and demand only Supreme Court Justice Kim Min-ki be recommended completely guts the Chief Justice's recommendation authority. In times like this, we must adhere strictly to the law and principles. Even if it takes time for the presidential office, that is the right path.
▷ Kim Tae-hyun: Understood. That will be all for today. This was Lawmaker 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 the interview in reporting,
please identify the channel name and the exact program title as follows:
[SBS Kim Tae-hyun's Political Show]
※ Please note: This article was translated by AI and may contain errors.
Video News
Video News
Video News
Video News