- Difficult Times Since Founding... Rebuilding Korea Party Must Prove Its Worth
- Lee's Centrist Pragmatism Is Not Enough... Clear Reform Is Also a Key Pillar
- Mega Special Zones Must Succeed... Cannot Become 'Anti-Labor Special Zones'
- A Party Bound to Merge Anyway? We Will Cooperate but Strengthen Ourselves
- We Will Compete Against Those in DP Who 'Hack Away' at Prosecution Reform
- Doubtful DP Merger Talk Will Be Pursued After Leadership Race
- Expanding Grounds for Case Dismissal? Just Codifying Existing Precedents
- PPP Claims 'Everything Traces Back to Lee'... A Political Claim
- Delaying Criminal Procedure Act Amplified Unnecessary Misunderstandings
- President Must Send Strong Message to Enforce Discipline in Public Service
- Cho Kuk Is a Strategic Asset... Will Entrust Party's Long-Term Strategy to Him

■ Broadcast: SBS Kim Tae-hyun's Political Show (FM 103.5 MHz 7:00 – 9:00 AM)
■ Date: July 31, 2026 (Friday)
■ Host: Attorney Kim Tae-hyun
■ Guest: Shin Jang-sik, Leader of the Rebuilding Korea Party

[Kim Tae-hyun]: Joining us today is the newly elected leader of the Rebuilding Korea Party, Representative Shin Jang-sik. Hello.

[Shin Jang-sik]: Hello, I am Shin Jang-sik.

[Kim Tae-hyun]: Congratulations.

[Shin Jang-sik]: I will accept the congratulations for now.

[Kim Tae-hyun]: That sounds like you feel there is a long road ahead.

[Shin Jang-sik]: There is indeed a very long way to go. The weight of responsibility on my shoulders is extremely heavy.

[Kim Tae-hyun]: I thought you would become party leader even before you declared your candidacy. When we finished our interview back then, didn't I ask you, "Bro, aren't you running for party leader?"

[Shin Jang-sik]: Well, it was a path I had no choice but to take.

[Kim Tae-hyun]: Then what is your rank in the state protocol hierarchy? An opposition party leader is quite high up, especially as the third-largest party.

[Shin Jang-sik]: I have no interest in such things, so I have never looked into it.

[Kim Tae-hyun]: In any case, the Rebuilding Korea Party achieved very good results in the general election after its founding, creating a major sensation.

[Shin Jang-sik]: That is true.

[Kim Tae-hyun]: But right now, it is true that this is the most difficult period for the party since its founding, isn't it?

[Shin Jang-sik]: Yes. It is a difficult and tough time, and for now, it seems the public feels a bit more disappointment than expectation. That is why I said I will accept the congratulations "for now" under these circumstances.

[Kim Tae-hyun]: What tasks lie ahead? What do you see as the most urgent matter right now?

[Shin Jang-sik]: First, we must convince the public that the Rebuilding Korea Party is useful. Many people perceive us—pardon my use of English—as a so-called "one-issue project party." That is, they think we are a project party formed solely around the single issue of prosecution reform. But since our inception, we have continuously advocated for an "advanced nation for social rights."

[Kim Tae-hyun]: Yes.

[Shin Jang-sik]: Prosecution reform is currently reaching its final legal stages, and former President Yoon Suk Yeol tripped over his own feet and was impeached from the presidency.

[Kim Tae-hyun]: Yes.

[Shin Jang-sik]: So then people wonder, "What is an advanced nation for social rights? That sounds unfamiliar." We are faced with the question of whether the Rebuilding Korea Party can continue to function as a useful party. Moreover, now under the Lee Jae-myung administration, answering the question of what the Rebuilding Korea Party's purpose is has become our most critical task.

[Kim Tae-hyun]: So you mentioned self-reliance and clear reform. You plan to prove your worth through those?

[Shin Jang-sik]: That is right.

[Kim Tae-hyun]: What do you mean by clear reform? Talking about social rights somewhat reminds me of the Justice Party.

[Shin Jang-sik]: In fact, "the future of progressivism" that President Roh Moo-hyun mentioned toward the end of his life, "the Seventh Republic" spoken of by former Leader Roh Hoe-chan, and "an advanced nation for social rights" all point to the same destination. We are thinking of building a country where welfare becomes a right, similar to Nordic welfare states.

[Kim Tae-hyun]: Yes.

[Shin Jang-sik]: Apart from our social policies, what I mean by the pillar of clear reform—for instance, I saw this in the Hankyoreh newspaper this morning: a special law on mega special zones is coming out next month, allowing four-year temporary contracts and exempting the 52-hour workweek, which they labeled in quotes as an "anti-labor mega special zone." It means something like this. President Kim Dae-jung once spoke of "a scholar's problem-solving consciousness and a merchant's sense of reality."

[Kim Tae-hyun]: Yes.

[Shin Jang-sik]: The Lee Jae-myung administration clearly pursues a centrist pragmatic line, and I believe that centrist pragmatic line must succeed. Right now is Lee's time. But does the success of a centrist pragmatic line mean the success of South Korea? A merchant's sense of reality without the scholar's problem-solving consciousness mentioned by President Kim Dae-jung can easily degrade into cheap trader calculations. At a time like this, one pillar must clearly uphold the scholar's problem-solving consciousness as a pillar of clear reform, while the other pillar is centrist pragmatism. These two pillars must support South Korea. Therefore, we will be the pillar of clear reform.

[Kim Tae-hyun]: Yes.

[Shin Jang-sik]: And these mega special zones, part of three major projects, must succeed. But they should not be dubbed "anti-labor special zones." I believe preventing that is the usefulness of the Rebuilding Korea Party.

[Kim Tae-hyun]: So, for example, even if the Lee Jae-myung administration says, "We must grant an exemption to the 52-hour workweek for this semiconductor mega special zone because China is chasing us furiously, and Chinese researchers work day and night so we must enable ours to do the same," the Rebuilding Korea Party will continue to raise objections?

[Shin Jang-sik]: Naturally. We had industrialization in the 1970s, followed by democratization after 1987 into the 1990s, but due to rapid industrialization, we could not properly prevent the spread of inequality. We must learn from history. Now we are in an era of massive industrial transition. In such an era, deepening social inequality or abandoning environmental responsibilities must not happen. I believe that is learning from history.

[Kim Tae-hyun]: How will you achieve self-reliance?

[Shin Jang-sik]: For self-reliance, I believe the basis of any living organism starts with breathing on its own.

[Kim Tae-hyun]: Right.

[Shin Jang-sik]: We need to take off the oxygen mask. I think self-reliance is completely natural and expected for a political party. Only by strengthening ourselves can we form coalitions, and only through coalitions can we talk about mergers or anything else.

[Kim Tae-hyun]: Yes.

[Shin Jang-sik]: So self-reliance is an obvious point. The reason we feel the need to emphasize self-reliance now is because when merger talk arose last year—just as a large ship rocks briefly in the wind and levels itself out, while a small boat sways heavily even in small waves—people began thinking, "Isn't that party going to merge anyway?" and started questioning our usefulness. So we are simply reiterating what should be obvious.

[Kim Tae-hyun]: So after finding your usefulness, pursuing a line of clear reform, and achieving self-reliance—since you also have a double-digit number of lawmakers right now...

[Shin Jang-sik]: Yes.

[Kim Tae-hyun]: Merger talk will come up again, as early as after the Democratic Party's national convention, or further down the road, right before the next general election.

[Shin Jang-sik]: It could come up. But regarding that, here is my view: First, we base ourselves on self-reliance, and we must cooperate as naturally as breathing on various issues. But we must also compete. For example, I think like this: Does reform or anti-reform, or the value of reform, get determined by a party's banner? That is, are all lawmakers belonging to the Democratic Party pro-reform? Recently, some were hacking away at prosecution reform. During the merger discussion, regarding the concept of public ownership of land proposed by the Rebuilding Korea Party—which, as Attorney Kim knows, is recognized by the Constitutional Court and has constitutional roots—some painted it red, calling it communist. Furthermore, they threw stones at so-called reformist presidents or reform figures with derogatory slurs. Are those people reformists? I do not think so. I believe we must compete with such individuals and offer a choice to voters who demand clearer reforms.

[Kim Tae-hyun]: The Democratic Party's convention is currently in full swing and very intense. Naturally, the issue of merging with the Rebuilding Korea Party is a topic there as well. It is an important issue for the DP. Looking at the three candidates: Candidate Jung Chung-rae says, "We must merge quickly." Candidate Kim Min-seok says, "We must discuss it step by step," though previously he once said, "Even if we do, it should be an absorption merger," adding, "Sorry, but what other method is there besides absorption merger?"

[Shin Jang-sik]: Yes.

[Kim Tae-hyun]: Candidate Song Young-gil says, "If I become party leader, I won't mention integration for one year after taking office. However, I will lower the requirements for a parliamentary negotiating group."

[Shin Jang-sik]: Yes.

[Kim Tae-hyun]: Among these three candidates, whose statement do you prefer the most?

[Shin Jang-sik]: First of all, I wish they would not use the Rebuilding Korea Party as a topic in their leadership race. The Rebuilding Korea Party is not a side dish dish that gets served and taken off the dining table at will, so I hope they refrain from doing that. I would ask them to extend courtesy and respect to a friendly party.

[Kim Tae-hyun]: Yes.

[Shin Jang-sik]: I wonder if there is even a need to comment on each of their statements. Because we say we will focus on self-reliance and cooperate as needed. In that case, they should listen carefully to the other side first. Aren't they just using us as fodder for their leadership race to differentiate themselves? Regardless of which of the three becomes party leader, will those words be pursued literally once in office? I don't think so. I hope they refrain from using us as material in their leadership race.

[Kim Tae-hyun]: Earlier, when the motion to extend the second comprehensive special counsel was being handled in the plenary session, you said the Rebuilding Korea Party would not just blindly agree to everything.

[Shin Jang-sik]: Yes.

[Kim Tae-hyun]: Does that also include a calculated step toward setting a new relationship with the Democratic Party?

[Shin Jang-sik]: As a result, it could look that way. But what was important at the time was that ambiguous messages were coming out from within the Democratic Party regarding the amendment and pursuit of the Criminal Procedure Act, for which a filibuster is taking place today. In particular, we could not accept the parts sponsored by Representative Hong Ki-won or later by Representative Kim Nam-hee. So we were saying that they must clearly state their stance and attitude before we could participate in the vote.

[Kim Tae-hyun]: For now, the Rebuilding Korea Party supports the Criminal Procedure Act amendment, correct?

[Shin Jang-sik]: That is correct.

[Kim Tae-hyun]: What is your view on the expansion of grounds for case dismissal?

[Shin Jang-sik]: That is simply codifying judicial precedents into law. As you know, South Korea is a civil law country, not a common law country like the United States or the United Kingdom where precedents act directly as law. Therefore, there are countless examples where Supreme Court precedents have been codified into statutory provisions. The expanded grounds for dismissal, such as abuse of prosecutorial discretion or illegal investigations, are matters where Supreme Court en banc rulings already exist. Similarly, the business judgment rule in the recent Commercial Code amendment was established by Supreme Court precedent, but since we are a civil law country, it was put into statute. Right now, isn't the People Power Party making a political argument until the end, claiming that 'everything originates from Lee Jae-myung'?

[Kim Tae-hyun]: So from the PPP's perspective, these were the points raised when enacting the special counsel bill on fabricated indictments. DP Judiciary Committee members argued that prosecutors fabricated evidence to make illegal indictments, and ultimately this connects to the president's trial...

[Shin Jang-sik]: See? Ultimately now...

[Kim Tae-hyun]: That is how the PPP sees it and talks about it.

[Shin Jang-sik]: I figured the PPP would say that. But once today's filibuster ends, let me predict how the PPP's stance will shift. They will say, "If this law causes harm to the public, it is all your fault." If they were truly worried about that, given the current parliamentary setup where it is frankly hard to block, and if they cared about harm to the public, I believe a responsible party's attitude would have been to participate more actively in the Legislation and Judiciary Committee's deliberations to scrutinize every single clause so that the public harm they worry about does not occur. Isn't that the role of an opposition party?

[Kim Tae-hyun]: But Representative, even progressive media seem to raise this point regarding the timing. Theoretically, this could apply to the president's trial, couldn't it?

[Shin Jang-sik]: A ruling to dismiss an indictment is made by the judiciary.

[Kim Tae-hyun]: The ruling is up to the judiciary.

[Shin Jang-sik]: Because the ruling is up to the judiciary.

[Kim Tae-hyun]: Why at this exact moment? With talks of withdrawing indictments and talks of consecutive terms causing a commotion, why create another controversy at this timing? That criticism comes not just from the PPP, but also from progressive media outlets.

[Shin Jang-sik]: I think delaying the Criminal Procedure Act amendment for too long brought about unnecessary controversy.

[Kim Tae-hyun]: Rather, it was done too late? It should have been done faster.

[Shin Jang-sik]: When it first came out, it should have been sorted out quickly. Before gatherings like those talking about withdrawing indictments appeared, we should have focused on swiftly refining the laws and systems. Instead, the Democratic Party was weak at gathering internal consensus. That is why it receives unnecessary misunderstandings or gets framed like that until the end. Even within progressive media—or media outlets labeled progressive—there are various opinions internally within news outlets as well.

[Kim Tae-hyun]: Yes. National Assembly Speaker Cho Jeong-sik's remarks about a constitutional amendment allowing consecutive presidential terms caused ripples. The presidential office drew a line saying there would absolutely be no consecutive terms. The president is returning soon. Do you think the president should personally address it once with his own voice to eliminate this controversy completely?

[Shin Jang-sik]: That is up to the president's judgment. Strictly speaking, seeing how he acts, he seems to be extreme 'T' [Thinking personality type].

[Kim Tae-hyun]: Extreme T?

[Shin Jang-sik]: He has often said it is impossible, so he seems to think, "Why should I speak about doing or not doing something that is impossible? Isn't that logically contradictory?" That is a logical mindset, but politically, I don't know what other judgment he might make. However, I believe there are more important things for the president to say when he returns.

[Kim Tae-hyun]: What would that be?

[Shin Jang-sik]: The Criminal Procedure Act passes today. But for the Serious Crime Investigation Agency and Prosecution Agency to open properly on October 2, about 180 related laws and investigation guidelines must be revised or reenacted. That must be done properly and quickly. Next, starting with the prosecution service and civil servants, I believe Minister Jeong Seong-ho should also give a very strong message: the president needs to deliver remarks enforcing strict discipline so that this law is implemented in line with the legislative intent without causing harm to the public. I think that is extremely important.

[Kim Tae-hyun]: Understood. Representative, we have one minute left. Is former Leader Cho Kuk a key asset or a liability for the Rebuilding Korea Party at this point?

[Shin Jang-sik]: He is definitely a strategic asset. A strategic asset. I have appointed him to return as head of the Innovation Policy Institute. In a political party, someone in my position has to respond immediately to changes in weather and seasons. But questions like "How has the climate changed?" or "Why was the heatwave so long this summer?"—shaping the party's long-term outlook and South Korea's vision—fall under the role of the institute director. So I thought we should divide our roles like this.

[Kim Tae-hyun]: Former Leader Cho Kuk recently asked the party to keep some distance from him, didn't he?

[Shin Jang-sik]: He meant that there are party member groups carrying Cho Kuk's name, and they should not do things that could needlessly be interpreted as representing Cho Kuk's intentions. His message was, "I will focus on my role in preparing long-term strategy. Do internal party politics together with Leader Shin Jang-sik."

[Kim Tae-hyun]: Understood. We will conclude here. We have been speaking with Shin Jang-sik, the new leader of the Rebuilding Korea Party. Thank you.

[Shin Jang-sik]: Thank you.

Copyright for this interview material belongs to SBS Radio.
When publishing the full text or quoting this interview,
please credit the channel and program name as shown below.

[SBS Kim Tae-hyun's Political Show]