The Chosun Ilbo, a far-right hegemonic

The Chosun Ilbo, a far-right hegemonic newspaper, said on the 16th that Yoon Suk Yeol's ...These are the opinions of three constitutional experts who predict dismissal and acceptance of the impeachment. The article No. 1 is a relatively normal and common-sense article that summarizes the reasons for impeachment of the 曲. However, the arguments of the two and three are those who advocate jurists, but they are based on the 阿 阿 who try hard to deceive and instigate people through fake hypothesis theories that are dangerous due to wrongdoings. They are basically disqualified as scholars. As such irresponsible arguments are being spread out, it is necessary to see a cross-section of those who make absurd claims, so I post them here for your information.

       ———

1. " "Mobilizing the military in the National Assembly is clearly unconstitutional. Otherwise, martial law will be abused."

◇ Professor Jeong Tae-ho of Kyung Hee University Law School: Citing Impeachment

The Constitutional Court will unanimously cite the Yoon Suk Yeol's impeachment trial. This is because it is clear that the president has violated the current constitutional order by mobilizing his troops. It is a serious violation of the Constitution that cannot be avoided. If we judge according to the law and common sense, we cannot draw a conclusion other than citation.

Declaration of emergency martial law is in violation of the Constitution and martial law both procedurally and substantially. In particular, if it is admitted that he attempted to take control of constitutional institutions such as the National Assembly or the National Election Commission, it would be difficult to avoid dismissal. President Yoon tried to establish a new system by neutralizing the National Assembly and establishing an emergency legislative body. The president, who is obligated to protect the Constitution, tried to remove the constitution.

Although the emergency martial law seems to have ended in two and a half hours, it is because the plan failed, not because the illegality is minor. If the Constitutional Court does not see it as a serious violation of the Constitution, the risk of abusing the emergency martial law in the event of a political crisis increases in the future. In the end, a "highway" will be laid where martial law can be abused as a means of politics.

The procedural issue of the impeachment trial that President Yoon has brought up is nothing but a time-consuming strategy. The impeachment trial is a special disciplinary procedure that is different from ordinary criminal proceedings, and the Constitutional Court should apply the Criminal Procedure Act only to the extent that it does not go against it. The legitimacy of the trial cannot be shaken by the fact that the court did not follow the criminal procedure law as it is. The court recently decided to cancel the arrest of President Yoon, raising some questions about the investigation process of the Corruption Investigations Unit, but as President Yoon has never properly responded to the investigation by the Corruption Investigations Unit, the trend of the impeachment trial will not be affected.

It does not mean that the Constitutional Court cannot make up its mind (on the 左顧右眄). Under former Presidents Roh Moo Hyun and Park Geun Hye, the Constitutional Court could only focus on presidential cases, but the situation is different this time. As other impeachment cases are also being reviewed and sentenced at the same time, the Constitutional Court has no choice but to lose energy.

Some judges may have differences in detailed logic, but I don't think it is enough to dismiss it. Since the division of public opinion is already serious, the Constitutional Court needs to speak in one voice to fulfill its role as the guardian of the Constitution. Only then can social confusion be minimized after the impeachment decision.

The Republic of Korea is a democracy based on the rule of law. This means that democratic procedures must be followed within the legal framework, not that the majority of the people can do anything they want. Even if the president was chosen by the majority of the people, he should be held accountable if he violated the constitution.

The Constitutional Court is a means to resolve political conflicts civilly. If the court disagrees with the result because it does not like it, it will inevitably lead to extreme confusion and civil war. I understand that if the impeachment is cited, supporters of President Yoon will feel a great sense of loss. However, for the sake of peace and maintenance of the Korean community, it is necessary to have an attitude to accept any outcome.

—-

2. "The illegality is not enough to dismiss... the witness and the evidence are poor."

◇ Hwang Do-soo, a law school professor at Konkuk University, rejected impeachment

The core reason for the impeachment of Yoon Suk Yeol is its violation of the Constitution and martial law law. The Cabinet meeting held on the day of the emergency martial law on Dec. 3 last year had procedural defects in part because the meeting lasted only five minutes and minutes were not prepared. However, the illegality is not serious enough to dismiss the president. What remains is whether there were any constitutional disputes such as blocking the National Assembly and arresting politicians.

The Constitutional Court limited the duration of interrogation of witnesses to 90 minutes while holding hearings for the impeachment of President Yoon, and even adopted a prosecution report denied by witnesses as evidence. The investigation of witnesses and evidence was conducted poorly. In particular, President Yoon's side applied for the Central Election Commission's server appraisal to the Constitutional Court three times in connection with the "suspicious election fraud," but all of them were dismissed without convincing reasons.

As there is a lack of evidence to form a conviction, it is impossible to determine whether there has been a violation of the law and the constitution in relation to the alleged disorderly conduct of the National Constitution or the level. As such, it seems that there is a lack of evidence to judge whether the president will be impeached or not. At least two out of eight judges believe that they will decide to dismiss the case because they believe there is a lack of evidence.

I think it is because of the lack of evidence that the Constitutional Court has not even been able to set the deadline for the sentence even though it has been nearly 20 days since the hearing was concluded. This is because there is a possibility that the judges may have been in labor over additional arguments or evidence investigation due to the poor overall hearing.

Some judges may think that the contents of the trial so far alone are sufficient to draw a conclusion, and some may think that it is insufficient. There must have been disagreement among the judges over whether the sentence should be enforced as it is. These are predictable situations in light of his experience as a constitutional researcher at the Constitutional Court for the past 10 years.

If this situation continues, the sentencing of President Yoon may be delayed until after April 18 when the terms of Moon Hyung-bae and Lee Mi-sun, the acting chief justice of the Constitutional Court, end. If the judges' disagreement over the sentencing is not narrowed, Moon has no reason to hurry up with the sentencing. He knows that if the impeachment is not cited, all the criticism from the progressive camp will be directed at him. For this reason, in the seven-judge system involving Ma Eun-hyuk, the nominee for the Constitutional Court justice, after Moon and Lee left the Constitutional Court, Moon will reconsider his argument