[Anchor]

Following our exclusive reports, evidence of evidence tampering and collusion between the police investigation team handling the Gwangju high school girl murder case and the father of the suspect, Jang Yoon-gi, who is also a police officer, is pouring out. There is a growing criticism that if it were not for the prosecution's supplementary investigations, these facts might never have come to light, raising serious questions about whether it is appropriate to abolish these investigative powers as the government and the ruling party are pushing for.

Reporter Jeon Yeonnam has the story.

[Reporter]

Take the 2022 Busan roundhouse kick assault case, for example.

It was through the prosecution's supplementary investigation that the crime was revealed to be not just attempted murder, but also sexually motivated.

The "Haedeun-i case," in which a mother beat her 4-month-old infant to death, and the assault case involving the late Director Kim Chang-min also had the full scope of their crimes uncovered through the prosecution's supplementary investigations.

In the Jang Yoon-gi case as well, after the suspect was initially referred to the prosecution on simple murder charges, the supplementary investigation led to an indictment for rape and murder. It also brought to light the actions of Jang Yoon-gi's father, a serving police officer, who disposed of items such as a sex doll, as well as allegations of shoddy police work.

These cases are seen as evidence of the necessity for the prosecution's supplementary investigations to serve as a check and balance on police investigations.

Consequently, voices from within the prosecution and the legal community are calling for the retention of supplementary investigation powers.

Critics point out that if investigations are left solely to the police, there is a risk that cases could be buried or lead to systemic corruption, and that uncovering the objective truth could become difficult.

A survey showed that 7 out of 10 members of the progressive group Lawyers for a Democratic Society (Minbyun) responded that "the prosecution's supplementary investigation powers should be fully or partially maintained."

[Lee In-ho / Professor at Chung-Ang University Law School: Investigative power is an extremely potent authority. If the prosecution's supplementary investigation power itself is removed, that system of checks and balances will not function. The resulting harm will ultimately fall upon the public.]

However, the government and the ruling party maintain their stance on abolishing supplementary investigation powers, citing the need to improve issues within the prosecution's own investigations.

While they argue that the power to request supplementary investigations is sufficient to keep police investigations in check, critics argue that there needs to be a discussion on how to sanction the police if they fail to properly comply with such requests, and who will control and oversee the appropriateness of police investigations.

(Video Editing: So Ji-hye)