People’s Power “Indiscriminate Inspection” vs. Kim Jin-wook, Minister of Airborne Transport “Legal”… Opposition parties fight over ‘communication inquiry’ of the Judiciary Committee

Kim Jin-wook, chief of the High-ranking Public Officials Investigation Office, answers questions from Rep. Kim Yong-min of the Democratic Party of Korea by showing data from domestic voice calls at a plenary meeting of the Legislative and Judiciary Committee held at the National Assembly on the afternoon of the 30th. Parliamentary photojournalists

In the Legislative and Judiciary Committee of the National Assembly, on the 30th, the opposition and opposition parties had a dispute over whether the correspondence data inquiry of the high-ranking public officials’ crime investigation office (the Public Investigation Service) was a temple. Kim Jin-wook, who was present, insisted on the immediate resignation of the People’s Power as “an indiscriminate and illegal inspection.” “There is no legal problem at all,” said the Democratic Party of Korea and Deputy Minister Kim, arguing, “The prosecution and the police have also inquired, so why do you call it a temple with only the Airborne Service?”

The National Assembly Judiciary Committee held a plenary session on the same day and asked questions about current issues related to the inquiry into communication data of the Ministry of Air Transport. People’s Power Rep. Kwon Seong-dong said, “So far, you have robbed 86 People’s Power lawmakers. What is the reason?” “Two people were arrested as suspects in the allegation of accusation, Kim Woong and Jeong Jeong-sik. The rest of the lawmakers have nothing to do with the allegation of the accuser.” He added, “Even in the dictatorship of the 1980s, there was no such thing as indiscriminate and illegal inspection of opposition presidential candidates and opposition lawmakers.”

Director Kim replied, “I will tell you clearly that it is not a temple.

Director Kim said, “Why do you only have us and say that it is a temple?” He said, “The opposition lawmakers are talking about looking at correspondence data. We did it 3 times for candidate Yoon Seok-yeol, 3 times for the Central District Prosecutors’ Office, and 3 times for our spouse (Kim Gun-hee). “I looked at the statistics released by the Ministry of Science, ICT and Future Planning last week, and the prosecutors inquired about communication data 597,000 cases, the police 1877,000 cases, and we did 135 cases,” he said. said.

The issue is whether or not the inspection of communication data by the Airborne Service is illegal. The Democratic Party and the Airborne Service are of the view that it is legal under Article 83 of the Telecommunications Business Act. The ‘communication data’ in question is information such as mobile communication subscriber name, resident registration number, address, and service subscription/cancellation date. These are information that investigative agencies can request and receive from mobile carriers without a court warrant. ‘Communication fact confirmation data’ is information such as the date and time of call and text message transmission and the location of the sending base station. In accordance with Article 13 of the Communications Secret Protection Act, data can be provided from mobile carriers only with a warrant.

The People’s Power is of the opinion that there is a possibility of illegal inspection because the inquiry has been made extensively, even for communication data of those who are not related to the incident. Representative Yoo Sang-beom of People’s Strength said, “If you look at the Telecommunications Business Act, it is said that criminal investigations should be done at a minimum.” Is there anyone involved?” he asked. He continued, “They ignored the restrictions stipulated in the law and unilaterally searched the data. This is a temple,” he said.

The People’s Power claimed that the Airborne Service conducted excessive inquiry on communication data, even compared to the prosecution. Rep. Yoo said, “The prosecution conducted 2.8 million communication inquiries out of 2.4 million cases. Then, each case was searched 2.2 times,” he said. Of course, he should be blamed.” Director Kim replied, “I will be more mindful in the future and reflect on whether the scope of the inquiry is too wide, and I will at least reduce the scope of the investigation in the future.”

The Democratic Party refuted the claim of the temple of the people’s power as “naeronambul”. The Democratic Party heard that in 2017, when Yoon Seok-yeol, the presidential candidate for People’s Strength, was the head of the Seoul Central District Prosecutors’ Office, the prosecution inquired about the communication data of Hong Jun-pyo, then the representative of the Liberty Korea Party, and the controversy over the inspection arose. Choi Kang-wook, chairman of the Open Democratic Party, said, “(At the time) Chosun Ilbo reported that ‘there are many opinions that it is difficult to conclude that the temple is aimed at a specific person’. One person (Candidate Yoon) is also a prosecutor, so the same content seems to apply.”

On that day, dozens of People’s Power lawmakers, including floor leader Kim Ki-hyeon and National Assembly Vice Chairman Jeong Jin-seok, held a sign in front of the meeting room and held up a sign that read, ‘Immediately resign the director of illegal inspections,’ and held a protest demanding the resignation of Director Kim.

Earlier that day, Kim Jong-in, chairman of the general election for the People’s Power, also said at a meeting of the election committee on the morning of the same day, “The Air Airborne Service seems to have become a government institution that creates fear in the people due to the recent indiscriminate inspection of civilians.” “Part of the prosecution reform promoted by the Moon Jae-in government “The Airborne Service, which was created as a result of this, conducted a civilian inspection similar to that of the Central Intelligence Agency in the 1960s and 1970s,” he said. Kim said in a meeting with reporters, “President Moon Jae-in has said that there will be no political intervention by authorities in power.

A key Blue House official met with reporters on the same day and said, “The Air Airborne Service is an independent organization.”

Related Post

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *