-Kim Min-seok's notepad? In preparation for the Seoul mayoral election
-Memos of various opinions heard... Even wrote his own name, "MS"
-Jung Cheong-rae displeased? Merely gathering opinions, not asking for his intention
-Lee Jin-sook and Han Dong-hoon "OUT"? It means unconstitutional acts won't be forgiven
-Han Dong-hoon has become a data leak scandal; he is unqualified to be a lawmaker
-Kim Seung-won can pass confirmation hearing; prosecution suspended indictment fearing acquittal
-Zero witnesses? Witness adoption is not easy... Han should be summoned as a witness
-Why is the opposition fighting over witnesses? They should vet him with their own competence
-Han Dong-hoon trapped in a massive pit... Action must be taken over collusion with prosecution
-Troop dispatch to Hormuz: if party acts preemptively, repercussions will grow
-Party must approach cautiously with the language of a final decision
 
■ Broadcast: SBS Kim Tae-hyun's Political Show (FM 103.5 MHz 7:00 – 9:00 AM)
■ Date: September 10, 2026 (Thursday)
■ Host: Attorney Kim Tae-hyun
■ Guest: Rep. Park Sung-joon, Senior Spokesperson of the Democratic Party of Korea
 
▷ Kim Tae-hyun: Yesterday, the National Assembly's Legislation and Judiciary Committee discussed adopting witnesses for Minister of Justice nominee Kim Seung-won, but failed to reach an agreement. Let us hear how preparations for the confirmation hearing are currently going from Representative Park Sung-joon, senior spokesperson of the Democratic Party of Korea. Hello, Representative.
 
▶ Park Sung-joon: Nice to meet you. It's been a while since I appeared here.
 
▷ Kim Tae-hyun: Good to see you again. It feels like you've been serving as spokesperson for your entire term.
 
▶ Park Sung-joon: I have been serving as spokesperson for a long time.
 
▷ Kim Tae-hyun: And you have also been in broadcasting for quite a long time. How do you find the role of senior spokesperson?
 
▶ Park Sung-joon: When we were in opposition, I served as senior spokesperson for a little over a month. But serving as the senior spokesperson of the ruling party teaches me a lot, as I get to know about state affairs as a whole.
 
▷ Kim Tae-hyun: That's right.
 
▶ Park Sung-joon: In terms of my personal political experience, it is a period where I am building up considerable expertise, and above all, it's very busy.
 
▷ Kim Tae-hyun: There are many issues.
 
▶ Park Sung-joon: A tremendous amount.
 
▷ Kim Tae-hyun: Regarding the issues I'd like to ask about. First, there's the notepad. Just earlier on MinTV [Democratic Party TV], Chairman Kim Min-seok appeared and said, "I didn't get photographed intentionally." Why did he write those names: "Cheong-rae, Won-sik, Hoon-sik"?
 
▶ Park Sung-joon: He mentioned it on broadcast earlier today. Yesterday, we had a leadership workshop. The party chairman, floor leader, and supreme council members were at the leadership workshop to prepare for policy legislation. At first, the administrative office chief came up to me and said, "A photo was taken." So at first, I thought a photo of me was taken. Flustered, I reported it to the chairman, and he was actually surprised as well. The entire leadership there saw how taken aback he was, not knowing that it had been photographed. So he really seemed unaware that it was captured.
 
▷ Kim Tae-hyun: Then was writing down all those names just for brainstorming ideas?
 
▶ Park Sung-joon: Listening to his explanation today—yesterday when I asked him what happened, he didn't say much, but I came here after listening to his detailed explanation on Democratic Party TV today—there has been a lot of talk within the Democratic Party about needing to prepare for the Seoul mayoral election, and
 
▷ Kim Tae-hyun: Even though only the first-instance ruling has come out so far.
 
▶ Park Sung-joon: What it means is that politics is all about preparation.
 
▷ Kim Tae-hyun: Because you never know what might happen.
 
▶ Park Sung-joon: So the party chairman is always a position of taking responsibility, right? And it is a role where one must ponder what needs to be done to win that election, and it seems he listened to various opinions. So he jotted those down, and by chance, that happened to be photographed.
 
▷ Kim Tae-hyun: It seems he said on MinTV today that he used his imagination to consider all potential candidates who could be mentioned. Names like former Trade Minister Kim Hyun-chong, Seoul National University Professor Kim Kyung-min, and former lawmaker Kim Jin-ai were mentioned, and it seems he made memos of considering them.
 
▶ Park Sung-joon: I don't know about Kim Hyun-chong, Kim Jin-ai, or Kim Kyung-min, but our lawmakers talk among themselves. The people mentioned earlier are talked about among lawmakers: "If we prepare for the Seoul mayoral election, don't we need people like this?" They naturally talk like that. But looking at it, the chairman had written down even more people.
 
▷ Kim Tae-hyun: But among those written down, former leader Jung Cheong-rae seems very displeased. Yesterday, he even posted on Facebook, asking why they keep bothering someone who lost, and saying Min-seok and Young-gil should run instead.
 
▶ Park Sung-joon: "MS" indicates that he wrote down even Kim Min-seok himself as part of brainstorming ideas, didn't he? Seeing how he explained on Democratic Party TV today that he wrote his own name, it shows his weight as party chairman. Moreover, he didn't actually ask those individuals about their intentions, did he? It was simply contents he jotted down as notes. That's why yesterday, I told reporters, "The party chairman must have a lot on his mind, so he is listening to various opinions." It carries that kind of meaning.
 
▷ Kim Tae-hyun: So former leader Jung Cheong-rae doesn't need to take it that badly.
 
▶ Park Sung-joon: I don't think it's appropriate for me to comment here on his personal opinions or feelings. But the essence of this is that Chairman Kim Min-seok was gathering diverse opinions on who would be the right candidate if there is a Seoul mayoral election, looking at aspects such as image, symbolism, and broader public appeal.
 
▷ Kim Tae-hyun: You mean he is in a position where he has to think about various options, even considering himself in the candidate pool?
 
▶ Park Sung-joon: He even mentioned that. Looking at the media, they were speculating on what "M" stood for and who it was, interpreting it in all kinds of ways, but he clarified it today.
 
▷ Kim Tae-hyun: Right, that it's his own name. Understood. And then there's "Lee Jin-sook, Han Dong-hoon OUT." Of course, among opposition lawmakers, the ones Chairman Kim Min-seok clashed with most recently were Representative Lee Jin-sook over May 18 [Gwangju Democratization Movement], and Representative Han Dong-hoon over Minister nominee Kim Seung-won. In the case of Representative Lee Jin-sook, are you seeking her expulsion over the May 18 issue?
 
▶ Park Sung-joon: Regarding anti-constitutional acts, the chairman clearly stated during his representative speech that anything outside the Constitution cannot be tolerated. In the history of our Republic of Korea and the history of our democracy, isn't it the shared consensus among ruling and opposition politicians alike that the victims of May 18 and the May 18 Democratic Uprising should be enshrined in the Constitution as constitutional values? Yet, looking at Representative Lee Jin-sook's conduct, calling it a riot and denying it, I personally believe this cannot be tolerated, and Chairman Kim Min-seok also seems to state clearly that such politicians should not be allowed to gain a foothold.
 
▷ Kim Tae-hyun: Having plans to pursue expulsion,
 
▶ Park Sung-joon: As for pursuing expulsion, an expulsion resolution has already been submitted, but realistically, the National Assembly Ethics Committee has not been formed yet, has it? That is why Chairman Kim Min-seok also mentioned on broadcast today that if we amend the National Assembly Act, we could suspend qualifications, couldn't we? It should also be approached from that perspective.
 
▷ Kim Tae-hyun: Amending the National Assembly Act to suspend qualification?
 
▶ Park Sung-joon: Yes, suspension of qualification. A two-thirds majority is—
 
▷ Kim Tae-hyun: For expulsion, under the Constitution.
 
▶ Park Sung-joon: Is for expulsion, and he suggested that we could strengthen the requirements for suspension of qualification with a simple majority or more.
 
▷ Kim Tae-hyun: Like that?
 
▶ Park Sung-joon: In the case of Representative Han Dong-hoon, looking at it now, it is turning into the Han Dong-hoon scandal, isn't it? Yesterday, during the interpellation session, Vice Minister of Justice Lee Jin-soo clearly stated that it was highly likely leaked illegally, explaining that it is an illegal leak. Didn't he say it was highly likely to have originated from the prosecution? The fact that things like an indictment plan report or investigation plans were disclosed confirmed yesterday that they came from the prosecution, and didn't the Vice Minister of Justice clearly state that this is illegal? Looking at this, Representative Han Dong-hoon himself seems to have become the Han Dong-hoon scandal. So, regarding a lawmaker committing illegal acts using a confirmation hearing as an excuse, Chairman Kim Min-seok also felt that it cannot be forgiven, which is why he wrote down his thoughts like that. That's why he wrote "Lee Jin-sook, Han Dong-hoon OUT" to show that anti-constitutional acts and illegality will not be tolerated.
 
▷ Kim Tae-hyun: Then, in the case of Representative Han Dong-hoon as well, are you planning to pursue expulsion or a suspension of qualification through an amendment of the National Assembly Act, just like with Representative Lee Jin-sook?
 
▶ Park Sung-joon: As for Representative Han Dong-hoon, since it has become the Han Dong-hoon scandal, I personally believe the National Assembly should take strict action against this. Chairman Kim Min-seok didn't say that, but from my perspective, Representative Han Dong-hoon's actions cannot be forgiven.
 
▷ Kim Tae-hyun: Then pursuing expulsion?
 
▶ Park Sung-joon: Rather than pursuing expulsion—since I am not the party chairman—I cannot say here that we are pursuing it. But regarding Representative Han Dong-hoon's conduct, I believe he is not qualified to be a lawmaker.
 
▷ Kim Tae-hyun: So there is a difference between you personally saying he is unqualified versus institutionally pursuing expulsion or amending the National Assembly Act to push for suspension of qualification, like with Representative Lee Jin-sook.
 
▶ Park Sung-joon: That would have to be discussed. What I mean is, didn't the party chairman say he is unqualified? Since he spoke about that on Democratic Party TV today, I share the same view, and many lawmakers hold that view as well.
 
▷ Kim Tae-hyun: But you mean you will give some thought to what to do institutionally?
 
▶ Park Sung-joon: Regarding institutional reform, didn't the chairman also talk about the legislative process today? Didn't he say today that if it can be done through legislative amendments at the National Assembly level, shouldn't there be a bill allowing for the suspension of qualifications for such erroneous views, anti-constitutional acts, and illegalities?
 
▷ Kim Tae-hyun: Understood. All of this arose because of the confirmation hearing for Minister nominee Kim Seung-won. How do you see it—is the party preparing well for the confirmation hearing? Do you think you can break through it?
 
▶ Park Sung-joon: Of course. Wouldn't that naturally be the case? Representative Kim Seung-won has been explaining well and clarifying various allegations raised against him on a personal level. In particular, regarding the allegations concerning Representative Kim Seung-won, about 11 prosecutors under the Yoon Suk-yeol administration, specifically under Han Dong-hoon's system, were deployed, weren't they? And after thoroughly digging through everything for three years, it ended in a suspension of indictment. Furthermore, at the end, looking at the investigation plan report and indictment plan report, didn't the reports state that the indictment was suspended because there was a high likelihood of an acquittal? They investigated thoroughly from top to bottom and found nothing, didn't they? Isn't that a clear conclusion?
 
▷ Kim Tae-hyun: It was reported that you held a late-night video conference with nominee Kim Seung-won. Was it on September 4? In a sense, that could be seen as the party's first strategy meeting. What did nominee Kim Seung-won say back then? Because if lawmakers didn't know the situation well, other lawmakers might have been worried.
 
▶ Park Sung-joon: He explained all of that context, but I don't think it would be appropriate for me to describe the contents of the video conference here.
 
▷ Kim Tae-hyun: But after the video conference ended, after hearing nominee Kim Seung-won's explanation, you judged that even though there are some media offensives and offensives from Representative Han Dong-hoon, we can break through this level of criticism, right?
 
▶ Park Sung-joon: Yes.
 
▷ Kim Tae-hyun: But why didn't you agree to adopt witnesses?
 
▶ Park Sung-joon: In the case of adopting witnesses, it is usually not easy for most ministerial nominees. There is just so much contention between the ruling and opposition parties.
 
▷ Kim Tae-hyun: But there were many instances where witnesses were adopted.
 
▶ Park Sung-joon: There were such cases, but recently, witnesses have hardly been adopted.
 
▷ Kim Tae-hyun: So what I'm curious about is, for instance, from the ruling party's standpoint, you wouldn't want to adopt witnesses who would speak unfavorably against nominee Kim Seung-won. But in the case of Mr. Kang Se-chan (founder of Genencell) or a certain Mr. Yang requested by the People Power Party, they don't seem likely to speak that unfavorably against nominee Kim Seung-won, so why oppose those two as well?
 
▶ Park Sung-joon: Well, I think disputes over witnesses have always existed. I have also been in the opposition before. For opposition lawmakers, it's not about witnesses; the confirmation hearing is a stage where their competence as an opposition party is put on display. Then they just need to demonstrate their own competence. Seeing them enter into disputes over witnesses over this makes me think whether they are unable to prove anything themselves, and in a way, it's declaring that they lack competence.
 
▷ Kim Tae-hyun: But from the public's perspective, they do want to hear from the parties involved in the case. For example, the media and the public are curious to know whether what's in the transcript disclosed by Representative Han Dong-hoon is really true, and what Mr. Yang's real intentions were when making those remarks, so they would like to hear from them.
 
▶ Park Sung-joon: Having served as senior deputy floor leader myself, reaching an agreement between the ruling and opposition parties on witnesses when adopting them is always very difficult. Looking at it from that perspective, such witness disputes have typically always existed, and in the end, it turned into a hearing vetting the nominee.
 
▷ Kim Tae-hyun: What about the issue of adopting Representative Han Dong-hoon as a witness? Because nominee Kim Seung-won said "Come out," and Representative Yoon Sang-hyun of the People Power Party also said "Let's call him and hear what he has to say." And he himself seems likely to attend if summoned.
 
▶ Park Sung-joon: But in any case, the ruling and opposition floor whips and lawmakers within the Legislation and Judiciary Committee have their respective positions. I'm not sure what should be done there. Personally, I also believe it is right to adopt Representative Han Dong-hoon as a witness.
 
▷ Kim Tae-hyun: Really?
 
▶ Park Sung-joon: Yes.
 
▷ Kim Tae-hyun: Then summon him and hold him to account over matters like the data leak?
 
▶ Park Sung-joon: In a way, it has now become the Han Dong-hoon scandal, hasn't it? Since that part is central, I don't think calling Han Dong-hoon as a witness is a bad idea.
 
▷ Kim Tae-hyun: Is that so?
 
▶ Park Sung-joon: Yes.
 
▷ Kim Tae-hyun: Then could he be adopted even today?
 
▶ Park Sung-joon: I wouldn't know that. Because that is for the members of the Legislation and Judiciary Committee to decide.
 
▷ Kim Tae-hyun: No, but the party leadership could really summon him—
 
▶ Park Sung-joon: That's because the committee members are experts within the Legislation and Judiciary Committee, aren't they? Then we respect the standing committee in that regard. Out of respect for the standing committee, the committee makes the decision.
 
▷ Kim Tae-hyun: Understood. Representative, let's play a balance game. It might be a game you don't really want to play. Regarding the issue of Minister nominee Kim Seung-won, Representative Han Dong-hoon says, "The essence is the 'oppa,'" while People Power Party leader Jang Dong-hyeok says, "The essence is not the 'oppa,' but the dropping of charges." Originally in a balance game, you have to choose between options you don't want to choose. In your view, who is right?
 
▶ Park Sung-joon: Leaving the balance game aside, looking at Representative Han Dong-hoon's attitude and behavior, as I was walking out of the National Assembly yesterday, he was holding a press conference in front of the National Assembly building. Looking at politicians, there are realms of composure and realms of excitement. In politics, one must be composed. Right now, he is caught in a frenzy and posting some 30, 40, or 50 times on social media, isn't he?
 
▷ Kim Tae-hyun: Yes.
 
▶ Park Sung-joon: That is spraying fire indiscriminately. He's firing away wildly without even knowing what it is. Because he is in a realm of excitement, it seems his strength to actually carry this forward has now run dry. Why? Because during his days as a prosecutor, when he poured out countless remarks like that, the media would pick them up and digest them, and verification wouldn't really take place back then during his days as a prosecutor. That was because it was shrouded in a veil, launching attacks from hiding in concealment. But at the National Assembly, doesn't everything go through openness and transparency for Representative Han Dong-hoon? Verification is conducted on everything. Looking at it that way, as this becomes centered on Han Dong-hoon, he has no cheerleaders or backup forces. So regarding this case, I view it as Representative Han Dong-hoon falling into a massive trap instead.
 
▷ Kim Tae-hyun: Rather, it has become the Han Dong-hoon scandal.
 
▶ Park Sung-joon: It has become the Han Dong-hoon scandal, hasn't it? Because across both ruling and opposition lawmakers, who would defend and support this behavior of Representative Han Dong-hoon right now?
 
▷ Kim Tae-hyun: Then what does the Democratic Party plan to do going forward? As for the hearing—
 
▶ Park Sung-joon: For Kim Seung-won's hearing, we proceed with the hearing, and regarding the Han Dong-hoon scandal, we are stating it clearly. Chairman Kim Min-seok also stated that legal action will be taken against everyone involved.
 
▷ Kim Tae-hyun: So the plan is—for example, was a complaint filed with the Corruption Investigation Office for High-ranking Officials (CIO) by Representative Jeon Yong-gi? I think a complaint was filed somewhere.
 
▶ Park Sung-joon: Representative Kim Dong-ah filed the complaint.
 
▷ Kim Tae-hyun: Representative Kim Dong-ah.
 
▶ Park Sung-joon: And various complaints are being filed, aren't they? That's why yesterday, the Vice Minister of Justice also stated clearly that this is illegal.
 
▷ Kim Tae-hyun: Yes.
 
▶ Park Sung-joon: Representative Han Dong-hoon has now become the Han Dong-hoon scandal and must be investigated, and if there are those who colluded with Han Dong-hoon, shouldn't action be taken against all of them? I think that is how it will proceed.
 
▷ Kim Tae-hyun: Then expulsion or suspension of qualification as well?
 
▶ Park Sung-joon: That is a matter to be discussed later. Since the chairman mentioned the National Assembly Act, I think you, Mr. Anchor, are getting too far ahead right now. If such issues arise, I believe they are matters to be discussed and decided later.
 
▷ Kim Tae-hyun: Understood. Honestly, nominee Yong Hye-in is more of a burden than nominee Kim Seung-won, isn't she? The sentiment within the Democratic Party seems to read that way. Because seeing what Representative Song Young-gil recently said, people are even saying that at this rate, forget the ministerial post, even keeping the parliamentary seat might be difficult.
 
▶ Park Sung-joon: I think it is difficult for me to express and answer that here. Right now, the party chairman is also—
 
▷ Kim Tae-hyun: The expression "Kim lives, Yong dies" [Kim Saeng Yong Sa] even appeared in the media.
 
▶ Park Sung-joon: That is just a media perspective. From the party's standpoint, I would say that we are currently in the process of gathering the public's opinions.
 
▷ Kim Tae-hyun: There is another difficult issue. Hormuz.
 
▶ Park Sung-joon: That really is a difficult issue.
 
▷ Kim Tae-hyun: Because many opposing voices are emerging within the party.
 
▶ Park Sung-joon: Because it is a diplomatic issue, we have our standing committee, the National Defense Committee, to clearly examine the government's stance and the U.S. stance, especially for diplomatic issues like this critical troop dispatch. We need to take it step by step while watching the discussions of the National Defense Committee; if the party responds preemptively, the repercussions will only grow larger.
 
▷ Kim Tae-hyun: Instead?
 
▶ Park Sung-joon: Yes. So in that regard, you can see that we are currently approaching it with caution.
 
▷ Kim Tae-hyun: Is it true that holding out without dispatching troops is somewhat difficult right now? Due to pressure or push from the United States.
 
▶ Park Sung-joon: I don't think that is something for me to comment on here. Historically, such diplomatic issues and troop dispatch issues carry tremendous diplomatic repercussions and public opinion repercussions domestically. Therefore, I believe the party's decision must be expressed in the language of a final decision, the language of a final stance. If we speak about every detail in advance, it would be like adding fuel to the fire, so I believe we need to be prudent.
 
▷ Kim Tae-hyun: Understood. We will wrap it up here. We have been speaking with Representative Park Sung-joon, senior spokesperson of the Democratic Party of Korea. Thank you.
 
▶ Park Sung-joon: Thank you.

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

[SBS Kim Tae-hyun's Political Show]