[Anchor]
Hello everyone.
This is the nine o'clock news on Saturday.
Today (Jan. 25), we open the news with the latest updates on President Yoon's investigation.
The prosecution requested the court to extend President Yoon's detention period, but the court did not accept it.
The court's judgment is that there is no reason for the prosecution to continue the investigation.
However, just four hours after the court's denial, the prosecution reapplied for an extension of the detention period.
The first report is by Hwang Jeong-ho.
[Report]
On the 23rd, after about a month of investigation, the Corruption Investigation Office (CIO) handed the case of President Yoon back to the prosecution.
[Lee Jae-seung/Deputy Chief of CIO/Jan. 23: "We judged that it would be efficient for the prosecution, which has to decide on indictment, to compile the investigation materials gathered so far and conduct additional investigations on necessary matters to clarify the facts of the case..."]
The prosecution, having received the case, applied to the Seoul Central District Court to extend the detention period until the 6th of next month.
This was to buy time for direct questioning of President Yoon.
However, the court did not grant the extension of the detention period.
The judgment was that it was difficult to see that there is a significant reason for the prosecution to continue the investigation into a case that the CIO has investigated and requested indictment."
The court cited that the CIO Act does not explicitly define the existence or scope of the prosecution's supplementary investigation rights.
In particular, Article 26 of the CIO Act states, "After the investigation, the CIO shall hand over evidence and other materials to the prosecution for indictment, and the prosecutor who receives them shall promptly notify the CIO of the indictment decision," which the court interpreted as meaning that the prosecution should only decide on the indictment regarding the CIO's investigation.
In response, just four hours after the court's denial, the prosecution reapplied for an extension of the detention period.
This is KBS News Hwang Jeong-ho.
Hello everyone.
This is the nine o'clock news on Saturday.
Today (Jan. 25), we open the news with the latest updates on President Yoon's investigation.
The prosecution requested the court to extend President Yoon's detention period, but the court did not accept it.
The court's judgment is that there is no reason for the prosecution to continue the investigation.
However, just four hours after the court's denial, the prosecution reapplied for an extension of the detention period.
The first report is by Hwang Jeong-ho.
[Report]
On the 23rd, after about a month of investigation, the Corruption Investigation Office (CIO) handed the case of President Yoon back to the prosecution.
[Lee Jae-seung/Deputy Chief of CIO/Jan. 23: "We judged that it would be efficient for the prosecution, which has to decide on indictment, to compile the investigation materials gathered so far and conduct additional investigations on necessary matters to clarify the facts of the case..."]
The prosecution, having received the case, applied to the Seoul Central District Court to extend the detention period until the 6th of next month.
This was to buy time for direct questioning of President Yoon.
However, the court did not grant the extension of the detention period.
The judgment was that it was difficult to see that there is a significant reason for the prosecution to continue the investigation into a case that the CIO has investigated and requested indictment."
The court cited that the CIO Act does not explicitly define the existence or scope of the prosecution's supplementary investigation rights.
In particular, Article 26 of the CIO Act states, "After the investigation, the CIO shall hand over evidence and other materials to the prosecution for indictment, and the prosecutor who receives them shall promptly notify the CIO of the indictment decision," which the court interpreted as meaning that the prosecution should only decide on the indictment regarding the CIO's investigation.
In response, just four hours after the court's denial, the prosecution reapplied for an extension of the detention period.
This is KBS News Hwang Jeong-ho.
■ 제보하기
▷ 카카오톡 : 'KBS제보' 검색, 채널 추가
▷ 전화 : 02-781-1234, 4444
▷ 이메일 : kbs1234@kbs.co.kr
▷ 유튜브, 네이버, 카카오에서도 KBS뉴스를 구독해주세요!
- Court denies detention extension
-
- 입력 2025-01-25 23:19:36

[Anchor]
Hello everyone.
This is the nine o'clock news on Saturday.
Today (Jan. 25), we open the news with the latest updates on President Yoon's investigation.
The prosecution requested the court to extend President Yoon's detention period, but the court did not accept it.
The court's judgment is that there is no reason for the prosecution to continue the investigation.
However, just four hours after the court's denial, the prosecution reapplied for an extension of the detention period.
The first report is by Hwang Jeong-ho.
[Report]
On the 23rd, after about a month of investigation, the Corruption Investigation Office (CIO) handed the case of President Yoon back to the prosecution.
[Lee Jae-seung/Deputy Chief of CIO/Jan. 23: "We judged that it would be efficient for the prosecution, which has to decide on indictment, to compile the investigation materials gathered so far and conduct additional investigations on necessary matters to clarify the facts of the case..."]
The prosecution, having received the case, applied to the Seoul Central District Court to extend the detention period until the 6th of next month.
This was to buy time for direct questioning of President Yoon.
However, the court did not grant the extension of the detention period.
The judgment was that it was difficult to see that there is a significant reason for the prosecution to continue the investigation into a case that the CIO has investigated and requested indictment."
The court cited that the CIO Act does not explicitly define the existence or scope of the prosecution's supplementary investigation rights.
In particular, Article 26 of the CIO Act states, "After the investigation, the CIO shall hand over evidence and other materials to the prosecution for indictment, and the prosecutor who receives them shall promptly notify the CIO of the indictment decision," which the court interpreted as meaning that the prosecution should only decide on the indictment regarding the CIO's investigation.
In response, just four hours after the court's denial, the prosecution reapplied for an extension of the detention period.
This is KBS News Hwang Jeong-ho.
Hello everyone.
This is the nine o'clock news on Saturday.
Today (Jan. 25), we open the news with the latest updates on President Yoon's investigation.
The prosecution requested the court to extend President Yoon's detention period, but the court did not accept it.
The court's judgment is that there is no reason for the prosecution to continue the investigation.
However, just four hours after the court's denial, the prosecution reapplied for an extension of the detention period.
The first report is by Hwang Jeong-ho.
[Report]
On the 23rd, after about a month of investigation, the Corruption Investigation Office (CIO) handed the case of President Yoon back to the prosecution.
[Lee Jae-seung/Deputy Chief of CIO/Jan. 23: "We judged that it would be efficient for the prosecution, which has to decide on indictment, to compile the investigation materials gathered so far and conduct additional investigations on necessary matters to clarify the facts of the case..."]
The prosecution, having received the case, applied to the Seoul Central District Court to extend the detention period until the 6th of next month.
This was to buy time for direct questioning of President Yoon.
However, the court did not grant the extension of the detention period.
The judgment was that it was difficult to see that there is a significant reason for the prosecution to continue the investigation into a case that the CIO has investigated and requested indictment."
The court cited that the CIO Act does not explicitly define the existence or scope of the prosecution's supplementary investigation rights.
In particular, Article 26 of the CIO Act states, "After the investigation, the CIO shall hand over evidence and other materials to the prosecution for indictment, and the prosecutor who receives them shall promptly notify the CIO of the indictment decision," which the court interpreted as meaning that the prosecution should only decide on the indictment regarding the CIO's investigation.
In response, just four hours after the court's denial, the prosecution reapplied for an extension of the detention period.
This is KBS News Hwang Jeong-ho.
이 기사가 좋으셨다면
-
좋아요
0
-
응원해요
0
-
후속 원해요
0
이 기사에 대한 의견을 남겨주세요.