[Edaily Reporter Kim Sung-kon ] “It’s not over until it’s over.” This is a famous baseball adage. The same applies to the controversy surrounding former Minister of Justice nominee Kim Seung-won. It was thought that everything would be settled with his voluntary resignation following the confirmation hearing. However, even after Nominee Kim’s withdrawal, the fallout and risks remain. To use a soccer analogy, while the 90 minutes of the first and second halves are over, an even longer period of extra time lies ahead.
In fact, a mountain of new allegations has surfaced since Kim Seung-won’s voluntary withdrawal. In particular, the allegations of sexual harassment against his staff and the additional allegations of drunk driving are nothing short of a fatal blow. While the National Assembly confirmation hearing may be over, the public’s scrutiny is still ongoing. If true, this is a matter that requires not just leaving the Democratic Party but also resigning from his seat in the National Assembly. Moreover, the “Kim Seung-won black hole” is a megaton-level crisis that could shake public sentiment during the Chuseok holiday. The party, the government, and the Blue House have literally fallen into a state of panic.
① Kim Seung-won, “Riddled with Allegations”: Why Was He Nominated as Minister?
The biggest source of suspicion is the former nominee, Kim Seung-won, himself. From the outset, even just the drunk driving and the false residency registration alone constituted grounds for disqualification as the head of the Ministry of Justice. In particular, false residency registration was a common reason for rejection in confirmation hearings under previous administrations when the Democratic Party was in the opposition. Furthermore, the various allegations that surfaced after Kim’s nomination—including the COVID-19 drug lobbying scandal triggered by independent lawmaker Han Dong-hoon’s relentless attacks—were on a level surpassing even the most sensational morning TV dramas.
Former nominee Kim’s lies are also a source of controversy. Although he claimed he was unaware that his aides had submitted a petition, reports emerged that he had met with them in person the day before his resignation to try to cover it up. For reference, Rep. Kim Tae-ho, a senior member of the People Power Party, was rejected during his 2010 Prime Ministerial confirmation hearing under the Lee Myung-bak administration after lying about his relationship with former Taekwang Industries Chairman Park Yeon-cha. This raises a question: Since former nominee Kim himself, more than anyone else, would have been most aware of his own moral character, it is simply incomprehensible why he accepted the President’s nomination to become a minister.
② Who Recommended and Vetted Him? The Theory of the Blue House’s Failed Vetting
The August 30 cabinet reshuffle was a high-stakes move by President Lee Jae-myung. It was a time when President Lee’s approval ratings were plummeting as the confrontation between the “New Lee Jae-myung” faction and his traditional base—characterized by the rivalry between “Moon-Jo-Teol-Lae-Yu” (Moon Jae-in, Cho Kuk, Kim Eo-jun, Jeong Cheong-rae, and Yoo Si-min) and “Han-Gang-Saedong-Dwae-Ju-Gil” (Han Jun-ho, Kang Deuk-gu, Kim Min-seok, Lee Dong-hyung, Kim Yong-min, Lee Eun-ju, and Song Young-gil)—reached its peak. However, the simultaneous withdrawal of Kim Seung-won and Yong Hye-in actually backfired. In particular, the case of former Minister of Gender Equality and Family nominee Yong Hye-in sparked controversy because even a basic fact—that she was holding dual roles as a minister and a proportional representative—was not verified.
The case of nominee Kim Seung-won is even more baffling, as none of the basic principles of personnel nomination and vetting were followed. Typically, the Senior Secretary for Personnel gathers various opinions from the party, the administration, and the Blue House to make personnel recommendations, while the Senior Secretary for Civil Affairs is responsible for vetting; however, both the recommendation and vetting processes were riddled with gaps. Furthermore, there is a significant risk that the vetting process will be neglected when the person making the recommendation holds considerable power. This is precisely why the media and the opposition are holding Kim Hyun-ji, the Chief of Staff, accountable, questioning who exactly made the recommendation and how the vetting was conducted.
③ Democratic Party’s ‘Defense of Han Dong-hoon’ Backfires… Kim Min-seok’s Gaffe: “The More I Look at It, the Better the Appointment”
The Democratic Party went all-in on “defending Kim Seung-won.” With former nominee Yong Hye-in having dropped out, they felt they absolutely had to protect former nominee Kim Seung-won. The situation even gave rise to the expression “Kim Seung-won’s defenders.” Party Leader Kim Min-seok emphasized, “The more I look at it, the better this appointment is. We will definitely protect him.” For Leader Kim, this effectively left him with a “famous quote” (?) that will inevitably haunt him for the rest of his political career. The Democratic Party also made a decision that ran completely counter to public sentiment by forcing through the adoption of the confirmation hearing report the day after the hearing. It cannot avoid criticism that it was excessively kowtowing to the Blue House.
Furthermore, the Democratic Party’s rigid response both before and after the confirmation hearing was disappointing. By focusing solely on the source of the evidence presented by independent lawmaker Han Dong-hoon, they suffered a crushing defeat in the public opinion battle. Following the Democratic Party’s logic, it would mean that—just as in the “Chowon Bokgukjip” incident from the 1992 presidential election, where the infamous quote “Who are we, if not each other?” was coined—the essence of the matter is not the illegal wiretapping by the Unification National Party or the National Security Planning Agency (NIS) “X-file” scandal involving illegal political funds, but rather that the late Roh Hoe-chan, a former Democratic Labor Party lawmaker who exposed these scandals, was the real problem. Former Representative Roh Hoe-chan once expressed his frustration, saying, “When I saw a thief and shouted, ‘Thief!’, they didn’t catch the thief—they just silenced the person who shouted.”
④ Press Conference Postponed by 30 Minutes · Chief of Staff Kang Hoon-sik Tends to Resign: “What’s Going On at the Blue House?”
The President’s schedule is measured down to the minute and second. Barring any unforeseen circumstances, events should proceed as previously announced. In an official briefing on the 15th, the Blue House announced that President Lee’s press conference for the public would take place at 10:00 a.m. on Friday, the 18th. However, on the day of the conference, it was postponed by 30 minutes. Considering that the press conference had initially been internally scheduled for 10:00 a.m. on the 17th before being pushed back by a day, something seems off. The Blue House explained that the delay was due to a lack of time caused by diplomatic commitments and President Lee’s need to refine his message until the very last moment.
This is understandable. In fact, the press conference at that time involved no shortage of sensitive issues, including △constitutional amendments for re-election △the dismissal of criminal charges △the appointment of Kim Seung-won △and the dispatch of troops to the Strait of Hormuz. However, the fact that a petition alleging sexual harassment and additional drunk driving allegations against former nominee Kim’s aides—as exclusively reported by KBS—had been submitted to the Blue House only fuels suspicions. The opposition is urging President Lee to disclose when he became aware of the petition. Furthermore, the sudden resignation of Kang Hoon-sik, Chief of Staff to the President, is also puzzling. Considering President Lee’s remark that he “hasn’t decided what to do yet,” this is a highly unusual situation given that there was no coordination with the President. In response, People Power Party Leader Jang Dong-hyuk launched an attack, asking, “So, is ‘Hyun-ji Noona’ really more powerful than ‘Hoon-sik Hyung’ after all?”
⑤ Top Keywords at Chuseok Dinner Tables: “Kim Seung-won,” “Withdrawal from the Democratic Party vs. Resignation from Parliament”
The Chuseok holiday is politically significant. Just like the Lunar New Year, it involves a massive nationwide exodus, which shapes public sentiment on major political issues across the country. In particular, public sentiment from the Seoul metropolitan area mixes extensively with that of regional areas such as Yeongnam, Honam, Chungcheong, Gangwon, and Jeju. Political discussions are also lively among parents and children, as well as between seniors, juniors, and friends. This is why both the ruling and opposition parties want to bring up the issues most favorable to them at the Chuseok dinner table.
Regardless of the ruling and opposition parties’ intentions, the biggest talking point is “Kim Seung-won.” Public opinion is not limited to simply calling for his voluntary resignation from the ministerial post. Even within the Democratic Party, some are hoping that former nominee Kim will leave the party. The broader opposition camp is going even further, urging former nominee Kim to resign from his seat in the National Assembly. The battle between the ruling and opposition parties over public sentiment during Chuseok is a complete defeat for the Democratic Party before it has even begun. The People Power Party, riding a wave of momentum, is facing the “happy dilemma” of expanding the “Kim Seung-won political situation” to include parliamentary oversight hearings and protests outside the National Assembly.
