Some things that come to mind

<Some things that come to mind about the decision to cancel the arrest>

The court's decision to cancel the arrest of President Yoon Suk Yeol is based on two reasons. There are points to think about,

1) Reasons for indictment beyond the legally permitted restraining period

- In this regard, the lawyers did a good job. They persistently attacked the practice that had been passed without much objection for decades (for example, the practice of calculating the time required for interrogation of suspects before arrest by day, not by time) and drew the court's decision. It is hard to be confident that such arguments will be accepted in such cases, but I think the lawyers did everything they could.

- However, although it is very cautious to bring this up, it is questionable whether the court can make such a decision at this point. Of course, the courts are each completely independent, but over the past few years, our courts have made decisions that are difficult to avoid criticism on several occasions. In particular, decisions in cases where major politicians are involved were often very different from those in which the general public is involved. The same is true of both the ruling and opposition parties and the progressive conservatives.

The court's decision is not evaluated purely logically in a clean vacuum, but it will be difficult to gain sympathy from the general public, at least if you say textbook words such as "strictly interpret them in favor of the suspect" as if nothing had happened after accumulating a hard-to-explain record.

2) Other reasons

- The court revoked the arrest for reasons such as the possibility that the Senior Civil Servant Corruption Investigations Unit would not have the right to investigate the crime of rebellion, and that there was no basis for the arrest period between the Senior Civil Servant Corruption Investigations Unit and the prosecution, which could later be the reason for the dismissal of the indictment. In other words, what we have tried so far could come to nothing.

- The existence of the Senior Civil Servant Corruption Investigations Unit itself is a fundamental problem. I have said it countless times, but the Senior Civil Servant Corruption Investigations Unit is a system that does not exist in any other country in the world, and it is an organization that does not fit the long-term development of the modern criminal procedure system. I don't know if I had at least simulated it before installation, but without such preparation, I pushed for it, shouting that if I just created the Senior Civil Servant Corruption Investigations Unit, it would be reformed by the prosecution. In addition, it should be said that the cause was also the bizarre act of dividing the authority of the investigative agency according to the crime.

- If the criminal procedure is ragged like this and the investigation and trial of such an important case are messed up, someone should be held accountable. How can the criminal procedure in the Republic of Korea be reorganized? I really want to ask you a word. Do you think it is still helpful for prosecution reform by creating an airborne organization.

I have to pass the Senior Civil Servant Corruption Investigations Unit unanimously, but I can remember the faces of people who criticized the prosecution reform for not voting for it, but I want to call out their names one by one