Legal disputes over Yoon’s probe

[Anchor]

As such, the legal debate surrounding President Yoon's investigation is intensifying, leading to growing controversy and confusion.

Reporter Choi Yoo-kyung has summarized the specific legal issues that the Corruption Investigation Office (CIO) and President Yoon's side are at odds over.

[Report]

The CIO has issued three summons notifications and attempted to execute an arrest warrant once so far.

President Yoon Suk Yeol's side has not responded to any of these.

They claim that both the investigation and the arrest warrant are invalid.

First, let's look at the issue of investigative authority.

After the adjustment of investigative authority between the prosecution and police, the authority to investigate crimes of insurrection is solely with the police.

However, the CIO asserts that they can investigate insurrection crimes as related offenses to the abuse of power, for which they have investigative authority.

On the other hand, President Yoon's side argues that due to the president's immunity from prosecution, the investigation into abuse of power itself is not possible.

For this reason, they maintain that it is also impossible for the CIO to investigate insurrection crimes as related offenses to abuse of power.

What about the issuance of the arrest warrant?

President Yoon's side raises an issue with the fact that the competent court is the Seoul Central District Court, while the CIO obtained the warrant from the Seoul Western District Court.

However, the relevant legal provisions state that the competent court can also be determined considering the location of the crime or evidence.

The court has also issued the arrest warrant twice, and the objection filed by President Yoon's side was dismissed.

The most contentious point is the execution of the arrest warrant.

The Presidential Security Service has stated that they blocked the execution of the arrest warrant based on Article 5 of the Presidential Security Act.

They argue that executing an illegal warrant falls under 'dangers' and that they designated a security zone.

However, legal experts point out that it is inappropriate for the Security Service to determine the validity of the warrant itself.

In response, Minister of the National Court Administration Chun Dae-yup stated, "It is fundamentally important to accept the results of a trial conducted in accordance with legal procedures, as this supports the rule of law."

This is KBS News, Choi Yoo-kyung.