-Non-combat deployment to Hormuz is inevitable, no other choice
-Understand public opposition to troop deployment, but it is a matter of national interest
-President Lee made the right decision; National Assembly consent motion must pass
-If there was wrongdoing, why did the Yoon administration suspend indictment for Kim Seung-won?
-Yoon and Han are two peas in a pod, acting the same…Source of audio recordings must be revealed
-Even if from an acquaintance, anyone would check with MFDS if it is a promising new drug
-Questions about the relationship linger, but not checking would have been a dereliction of duty
-Yong Hye-in's controversy over holding dual roles… Likely difficult to endure confirmation hearing
-In public office, even if you think you are right, if the people say no, it is a no
-Must move forward together with Cho Kuk…"Red Team" role is good, but restraint is needed

■ Broadcast: SBS Kim Tae-hyun's Political Show (FM 103.5 MHz 7:00 – 9:00)
■ Date: September 7, 2026 (Mon)
■ Host: Attorney Kim Tae-hyun
■ Guest: Rep. Park Ji-won (Democratic Party of Korea)
 
[Kim Tae-hyun]: He joins us biweekly. Today, we speak by phone with nine-term veteran politician, Democratic Party of Korea lawmaker Park Ji-won. Hello, lawmaker.
 
[Park Ji-won]: Hello. This is Park Ji-won.
 
[Kim Tae-hyun]: Lawmaker, the issue of troop deployment to the Strait of Hormuz in the Middle East has come up again. Looking at what you previously said, you stated, "On the premise of non-war and non-combat purposes, we must respond to the troop deployment request for the sake of various relations with the United States." Do you believe that deploying troops brings more benefits than losses?
 
[Park Ji-won]: There is no other choice. Of course, Iran considers it an act of war, but given the need to protect our vessels in the Strait of Hormuz and considering our various relations with the United States, if it is a non-combat role, isn't dispatching troops somewhat inevitable? I recognize that inevitability.
 
[Kim Tae-hyun]: Inevitability?
 
[Park Ji-won]: Yes.
 
[Kim Tae-hyun]: According to an SBS exclusive report, our government is reviewing a plan to deploy maritime patrol aircraft and an explosive ordnance disposal unit of about 50 personnel, excluding combat logistics support ships. Do you believe there would be no major issue with that level of deployment?
 
[Park Ji-won]: Well, the specific details must be closely negotiated between the government and the United States. However, unconditionally refusing the deployment or sending combat troops could cause problems in the future, so it must be carefully reviewed.
 
[Kim Tae-hyun]: There have also been reports that President Trump suggested supplying South Korea's Cheongung-II weapons system to Ukraine. For example, do you see this as meaning that if we do not deploy troops, pressure of this kind will continue to intensify?
 
[Park Ji-won]: Given President Trump's tendencies, that could be possible. However, from the beginning, we have not supplied lethal weapons directly to Ukraine; we used indirect exports. While we could not stop countries like Poland or the United States from importing and providing them on their own, we have never directly exported systems like Cheongung-II. I think it would be difficult this time as well unless it follows that kind of method.
 
[Kim Tae-hyun]: Iran is immediately pushing back strongly, saying that if South Korea deploys troops to Hormuz, it will be considered entering the war. How should this issue be resolved?
 
[Park Ji-won]: From Iran's perspective, they cannot help but react that way.
 
[Kim Tae-hyun]: From Iran's standpoint.
 
[Park Ji-won]: In the past, our economic sanctions might not even be completely over yet. Because such issues remain, Iran is likely to hold a firmer stance. However, we also have our own circumstances and our relationship with the United States, so I believe it will be handled well.
 
[Kim Tae-hyun]: But there is also pushback from within the progressive bloc. The Rebuilding Korea Party, the Progressive Party, and the Justice Party are opposed, and civic groups are also voicing opposition. There are dissenting voices within the Democratic Party as well, arguing that it violates Article 5 of our Constitution. Looking at Article 5...
 
[Park Ji-won]: Of course, we must fully understand the position of those within our bloc who have no choice but to oppose it. However, above all, this is a matter of relations with the United States and a question of national interest, so resolving this is a difficult challenge.
 
[Kim Tae-hyun]: So you believe this decision by President Lee Jae-myung was the right one?
 
[Park Ji-won]: That is how I see it.
 
[Kim Tae-hyun]: In any case, the president will need to persuade opponents within the bloc.
 
[Park Ji-won]: That is correct.
 
[Kim Tae-hyun]: In the end, do you believe this will pass the National Assembly?
 
[Park Ji-won]: Shouldn't it naturally pass?
 
[Kim Tae-hyun]: Understood. Let's move on to this topic. Regarding the allegations of soliciting clinical trials for a new drug involving Minister of Justice nominee Kim Seung-won, independent lawmaker Han Dong-hoon has been releasing audio recordings, creating significant fallout. How do you view this issue?
 
[Park Ji-won]: I cannot understand lawmaker Han Dong-hoon's attitude. Under Yoon Suk Yeol and Han Dong-hoon, 15 prosecutors investigated nominee Kim Seung-won for three years. If there was wrongdoing, wouldn't they have sent him to prison rather than granting a suspension of indictment? Who granted the suspension of indictment? It was Han Dong-hoon's prosecution. Yet now, he suddenly brings out such audio recordings. Look at how Prosecutor General Yoon Suk Yeol acted during the confirmation hearing for Justice Minister nominee Cho Kuk. Seeing this, I think Yoon Suk Yeol and Han Dong-hoon are two peas in a pod, acting completely alike. Therefore, I believe lawmaker Han Dong-hoon must first clearly disclose where he obtained these audio recordings. Furthermore, he should explain why an indictment was suspended instead of prosecuting, before pursuing these claims.
 
[Kim Tae-hyun]: Regarding the whistleblower, lawmaker Han Dong-hoon stated that "there are many righteous people who blow the whistle for the public interest." Do you believe this disclosure has no public interest aspect at all?
 
[Park Ji-won]: Well, it was during the COVID-19 pandemic when there was massive turmoil due to a shortage of pharmaceuticals. If an acquaintance of mine had developed such a promising treatment, I too would have inevitably checked with the Ministry of Food and Drug Safety. And when it turned out to have no efficacy, nominee Kim Seung-won stepped away from it. Isn't that completely natural?
 
[Kim Tae-hyun]: But setting aside whether this legally ended with a suspension of indictment...
 
[Park Ji-won]: You cannot set that aside. If the Yoon Suk Yeol-Han Dong-hoon prosecution deployed 15 prosecutors and investigated for three years, if there was a crime, wouldn't they have sent lawmaker Kim Seung-won to prison rather than suspending the indictment? What was the reason for suspending the indictment? They should disclose that first.
 
[Kim Tae-hyun]: Nominee Kim's side maintains the position that they merely relayed a public-interest civil complaint. However, the phone conversation contains terms of endearment and phrases like "I'll run over" and "I miss you."
 
[Park Ji-won]: Well, I also have questions regarding that personal relationship. But at the time, the country was in the midst of the COVID-19 pandemic—how urgent was the situation? If someone claimed to have developed something like that, couldn't a lawmaker inquire in the public interest? Not doing so might have even been a dereliction of duty. And once it was determined to be ineffective, lawmaker Kim Seung-won washed his hands of it. So I believe this matter and that matter must be distinguished. Therefore, they must first explain why the suspension of indictment was granted and where lawmaker Han Dong-hoon obtained those recordings.
 
[Kim Tae-hyun]: Regarding that suspension of indictment, lawmaker Han Dong-hoon's side claims that an indictment should have been filed originally and that the prosecution investigation team internally reported it as such. However, they argue that following the December 3 martial law incident, prosecution leadership covered it up because they felt burdened by indicting a member of the Legislation and Judiciary Committee. What are your thoughts on that?
 
[Park Ji-won]: Is that something the prosecution can reasonably say? If prosecutors believe someone is guilty, are they the kind of people who would refrain from indicting just because someone is on the Legislation and Judiciary Committee or any other committee? That is an excuse.
 
[Kim Tae-hyun]: Lawmaker, Rep. Kim Dong-ah has now filed a complaint against lawmaker Han with the Corruption Investigation Office for High-ranking Officials (CIO), and Rep. Kim Hyun-jung raised allegations that private equity firm MBK is behind the attempts to shake nominee Kim Seung-won. The party appears to be responding very aggressively.
 
[Park Ji-won]: Well, anyone should address this issue clearly. The public holds these suspicions, and the person in question is a Justice Minister nominee. In that case, everything must be scrutinized. But what I am focusing on is the suspension of indictment under Han Dong-hoon's prosecution, and where lawmaker Han obtained those audio recordings—that must be clarified first.
 
[Kim Tae-hyun]: Understood. Let's talk about Minister nominee Yong Hye-in. Currently, there seem to be few defending voices even within the Democratic Party, and many women's organizations have turned their backs. How do you think nominee Yong Hye-in should be handled in the current situation?
 
[Park Ji-won]: Initially, looking at her as a female ministerial nominee in her 30s and considering the path she has walked, I thought she might be suitable for minister. And since the Basic Income Party is a one-person party, I thought she had no choice but to hold her National Assembly seat concurrently. However, looking at what is coming out now, though we will only know for sure after the hearing, it seems it will be difficult for her to endure.
 
[Kim Tae-hyun]: Really? Then do you believe it is right for nominee Yong Hye-in to have her nomination withdrawn or voluntarily resign after the hearing?
 
[Park Ji-won]: We will know after the hearing. But my sense is that for any public office, no matter how right you think you are, if the public does not think you are right, you cannot do it.
 
[Kim Tae-hyun]: That is true.
 
[Park Ji-won]: Therefore, I believe it is worth reconsidering.
 
[Kim Tae-hyun]: So from the Democratic Party's perspective, you are saying that nominee Yong Hye-in cannot be protected, while nominee Kim Seung-won should be defended to the end—is that the right way to approach this?
 
[Park Ji-won]: Rather than viewing it through the logic of "protecting," we must look seriously at public opinion regarding nominee Yong Hye-in, as even progressive women's groups are showing pushback. As for nominee Kim Seung-won, let us first dig into the issues surrounding lawmaker Han Dong-hoon.
 
[Kim Tae-hyun]: You mean that public sentiment toward the two nominees may differ.
 
[Park Ji-won]: What is different?
 
[Kim Tae-hyun]: That public opinion could view nominee Yong Hye-in and nominee Kim Seung-won somewhat differently.
 
[Park Ji-won]: That is how I see it.
 
[Kim Tae-hyun]: Understood. In any case, while the final outcome is not yet determined, various suspicions are being raised regarding both nominee Yong Hye-in and nominee Kim Seung-won. That is the reality.
 
[Park Ji-won]: When it comes to confirmation hearings, such things always surface because we have lived through such eras in our past.
 
[Kim Tae-hyun]: Lawmaker, you also spent a long time in the Blue House. In cases like this, do you think the Blue House failed to recognize these controversies initially, or do you think they recognized them and decided it was acceptable to proceed from a political judgment?
 
[Park Ji-won]: Both could be true. When appointments are made, the personnel vetting line in the Blue House screens them because issues can get caught. There are judgments that "this level should be fine," and there are also cases where things fail to get filtered out. It would be difficult to point definitively to just one.
 
[Kim Tae-hyun]: Understood. Since you held key roles in the Blue House during the Kim Dae-jung administration—though it was quite some time ago—compared to back then, is personnel vetting more difficult for the president today?
 
[Park Ji-won]: Naturally, during former President Kim Dae-jung's time, confirmation hearings were just being introduced for the first time. Therefore, the standards were somewhat more flexible. In addition, the National Assembly had not yet developed the know-how, so it was not as meticulous. Now, vetting is conducted very thoroughly, so the Blue House must check carefully, and public opinion must also be closely observed. Above all, the nominees themselves are what matters most.
 
[Kim Tae-hyun]: Understood. Recently, Director Cho Kuk, who has positioned himself as a "Red Team" critic for President Lee Jae-myung and the Democratic Party, posted on social media: "When I banged loudly on the main gate as a warning signal to properly repay a favor, they threw filth at me, calling it noisy." He took aim at the Democratic Party for criticizing him. How did you interpret Director Cho's remarks?
 
[Park Ji-won]: I have also sharply criticized Director Cho, but in any case, Director Cho and our party are comrades who must walk together, and we share the same goals. Therefore, let us exercise mutual restraint; while a Red Team is good and a Yellow Team is good, let us exercise moderation. I understand that Director Cho has also been exercising much restraint recently, so things will head in a positive direction.
 
[Kim Tae-hyun]: What do you see as Director Cho's political intention or purpose? He seems to be taking a strong stance because he has some objective.
 
[Park Ji-won]: Well, if I speak about that here, another controversy will erupt. Therefore, I hope we settle this by being patient with each other and moving forward together. I understand Director Cho is also proceeding in that manner.
 
[Kim Tae-hyun]: Lastly, let me ask you about this issue. On an idea from the Ministry of Economy and Finance, KEPCO proposed to Samjeonnix that it prepay five years' worth of electricity bills, amounting to about 25 trillion won. How do you view this? While KEPCO's position is understandable, some worry it places too much burden on the enterprise.
 
[Park Ji-won]: Well, KEPCO has often provided significant discounts on electricity rates for corporations. Since Samjeonnix is performing well now and KEPCO is struggling, I believe KEPCO could reasonably make a request to prepay.
 
[Kim Tae-hyun]: Understood. We will wrap up today's interview here. This was Democratic Party of Korea lawmaker Park Ji-won. Thank you.
 
[Park Ji-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 identify the channel and exact program name as shown below.

[SBS Kim Tae-hyun's Political Show]