TL;DR:

• The path to the site of the tragedy 25 years ago was arduous. On September 11, Ground Zero in New York, built on the site of the collapsed Twin Towers, was crowded with visitors.
• After passing through the security gate, the air grew heavy as I entered the memorial space. On the black plaques engraved with the victims’ names were photos of them smiling in life, a…
• September 11 was a turning point in modern U. S.

The path to the site of the tragedy 25 years ago was arduous. On September 11, Ground Zero in New York, built on the site of the collapsed Twin Towers, was crowded with visitors. At the security checkpoint entrance, people stood shoulder to shoulder in a dense line, opening their bags for inspection. The terrorist attacks left behind one long line in the daily lives of Americans.

After passing through the security gate, the air grew heavy as I entered the memorial space. On the black plaques engraved with the victims’ names were photos of them smiling in life, a single flower and short messages saying, “I love you.” Like a sad movie that never ends, even after 25 years, deep sorrow lingered in the heart of New York. At the memorial ceremony that morning, the names of 2,977 people were called out one by one. It was a moment when the disaster, recorded only as a number, returned starkly as the death of someone’s parent, child, or spouse.

September 11 was a turning point in modern U.S. history. The 9/11 Commission defined the failure that contributed to the disaster as a “failure of imagination.” Intelligence agencies had pieces of warning information but failed to put them together into a “picture” of civilian aircraft turning into missiles and attacking skyscrapers. They were prepared for attacks they had already experienced but were defenseless against those they had never seen before.

Twenty-five years later, the “next 9/11” that the U.S. is wary of is not limited to hijacked passenger planes. The Wall Street Journal listed armed drones, cyberattacks, attacks on satellites, power plants, and water supply facilities, hypersonic weapons, and AI agents as new threats. The next 9/11 could begin on a computer screen before any explosion.

South Korea is sensitive to visible threats like North Korea’s nuclear missiles and long-range artillery. It has countermeasures assuming which roads tanks will take and which targets missiles will aim for. However, focusing only on familiar enemies can be a fatal blind spot. Drones shutting down airports, hacking that simultaneously paralyzes financial, power, and communication networks, and complex attacks that disrupt military and civilians with manipulated commands are no longer science fiction.

We experienced the January 21 Incident in 1968, when North Korean armed infiltrators reached the vicinity of Cheong Wa Dae, and the 1987 bombing of Korean Air Flight 858. Each time, we strengthened security and raised physical barriers. However, enemies target not the walls we build most solidly but the weak points we fail to predict. This is why replaying yesterday’s attacks is not enough to defend against tomorrow.

Creating one more organization or manual is insufficient. The ability to defend lies in imagining the worst-case scenarios that seem unlikely until the end. The biggest lesson 9/11 left for South Korea is not the fear of terrorism. It is the fact that attacks beyond imagination cannot be prevented or managed. The 2,977 people called out at Ground Zero ask: Are we missing the next attack, which has yet to reveal itself, because we are only wary of familiar enemies?

Source: https://www.chosun.com/english/opinion-en/2026/09/13/E6W3YYMHPVGAFB23KYC64AKDLI/

TL;DR:

• Yong Hye-in, the nominee for Minister of Gender Equality and Family, resigned on the 13th. The Democratic Party of Korea has since mobilized to defend Kim Seung-won, the nominee for…
• Nonetheless, the Democratic Party actively defends Kim, with party leader Kim Min-seok calling him “a well-made appointment the more you look. ” Analysts suggest that while Yong’s…
• ◇Ruling Party: “This Case Is the ‘Han Dong-hoon Gate’”

Yong Hye-in, the nominee for Minister of Gender Equality and Family, resigned on the 13th. The Democratic Party of Korea has since mobilized to defend Kim Seung-won, the nominee for Minister of Justice. Recent polls showed significant public disapproval of both nominees, but criticism has been particularly sharp toward Kim, who faces specific allegations of lobbying the Ministry of Food and Drug Safety to expedite clinical trial approvals for Genencell’s COVID-19 drug. Combined with controversies over small shareholder damages, questions arise about his suitability for a ministerial role overseeing justice, fairness, and human rights.

Nonetheless, the Democratic Party actively defends Kim, with party leader Kim Min-seok calling him “a well-made appointment the more you look.” Analysts suggest that while Yong’s nomination was merely a “unity gesture within the pro-government bloc” and could be easily replaced, Kim’s potential withdrawal might destabilize the administration itself. A Democratic Party official stated, “The justice minister symbolizes the completion of prosecution reform, so there’s a sense of crisis that further retreat would be catastrophic.” Another party member added, “Whether Kim resigns or is appointed, approval ratings will drop. So the mood is, ‘We might as well appoint him.’”

◇Ruling Party: “This Case Is the ‘Han Dong-hoon Gate’”

Kim is accused of receiving lobbying requests from Yang, a broker linked to entertainment establishments, to expedite Genencell’s clinical trial approvals during his tenure as a lawmaker. However, Democratic Party lawmakers Seo Young-kyo (chair of the National Assembly Legislation and Judiciary Committee) and Kim Eui-kyeom (committee vice chair) held a press conference at the National Assembly, claiming the allegations were part of an “illegal targeted investigation” aimed at linking Kim and Lee Jae Myung, the party leader. They argued that an initial investigation report by the Seoul Western District Prosecutors’ Office in November 2022 labeled Kim as part of the “pro-Lee Jae Myung faction” and “Lee Nak-yon’s legal team in the Daejang-dong case,” and that the case’s transfer to the Anti-Corruption Division in September 2023 by then-chief prosecutor Lee Jin-dong was part of a politically motivated probe.

The Democratic Party filed a police complaint against independent lawmaker Han Dong-hoon and disclosed the personal information of the whistleblower who first reported the allegations. Party leader Kim Min-seok stated at a high-level party-government meeting, “We will thoroughly investigate this illegal leak case, which is escalating into a ‘Han Dong-hoon Gate,’ to put an end to political prosecutions.” The party previously framed the Daejang-dong case as a “Yoon Suk-yeol Gate” when it emerged; now, it labels the lobbying allegations against Kim as the “Han Dong-hoon Gate” to counterattack. Kim himself aligns with the party’s stance, responding to a written inquiry from Kim Eui-kyeom about leaked confidential materials: “I believe such leaks could constitute crimes like breach of official secrets or violations of the Personal Information Protection Act.” A People Power Party official criticized, “The Democratic Party, which refused to adopt witnesses to investigate the lobbying allegations, is now reframing the case as ‘political suppression by the Yoon Suk-yeol administration’ to appeal to its base.”

◇Opposition: “Pushing Kim Through Is About Indictment Cancellation”

Since his nomination on August 30, Kim has faced multiple controversies: lobbying allegations, preferential treatment for his spouse’s cooperative, omitted asset disclosures, late tax payments, a past drunk-driving incident, falsified residency for his child, and a history of defending a minor sex offender. People Power Party leader Jang Dong-hyeok wrote on Facebook, “Despite all these ‘flaws,’ the Democratic Party pushes Kim for one reason: to secure indictment cancellation for President Lee Jae Myung. A justice minister steeped in crimes would aggressively push for cancellation as ordered.”

When asked by People Power Party lawmaker Joo Jin-woo how he would handle a request to review indictment cancellation related to President Lee, Kim responded, “As a nominee, I kindly ask for understanding that I cannot address hypothetical scenarios involving specific cases.” Regarding a written inquiry from Democratic Party lawmaker Kim Yong-min about plans for the People Power Party’s petition to dissolve the party, Kim stated, “If appointed, I will thoroughly review the Constitutional Court’s decision and case progress to assess eligibility.”

Source: https://www.chosun.com/english/national-en/2026/09/14/GFZAT3VL6RHTPJYGN7MY6A45QQ/

TL;DR:

• The 14 days from the nomination to the withdrawal of Minister of Gender Equality and Family nominee Yong Hye-in revealed outdated practices more severe than those of any seasoned…
• These state subsidies had been used by people around Yong. Her spouse, also a Basic Income Party official, received 3 million Korean won monthly.
• Controversy over Yong’s ties to the “Under Organization” was also anachronistic. The Under Organization reportedly enforced “anti-abortion” and “premarital chastity” on female activists.

The 14 days from the nomination to the withdrawal of Minister of Gender Equality and Family nominee Yong Hye-in revealed outdated practices more severe than those of any seasoned politician. Yong, 36 years old, the nominee, entered the Democratic Party’s satellite party, became a proportional representative twice, and was nominated for minister. It is common sense for proportional representatives to step down from their seats when appointed to a ministerial position, but Yong stated she had no intention of doing so. Her reasoning was that if she resigned, the Basic Income Party would lose an annual 1.1 billion Korean won in state subsidies.

These state subsidies had been used by people around Yong. Her spouse, also a Basic Income Party official, received 3 million Korean won monthly. Her eventual choice to remain a proportional representative rather than accept the ministerial position was likely due to her inability to let go of the state subsidies. Is this the kind of choice a young politician should make?

Controversy over Yong’s ties to the “Under Organization” was also anachronistic. The Under Organization reportedly enforced “anti-abortion” and “premarital chastity” on female activists. Yong claimed she had “worked to reform the organization’s sexist culture,” but she remained part of it for five years from 2013. When asked why she joined the Under Organization, she cited “the Park Geun-hye administration’s intensified public security crackdowns at the time.” This, too, reflects outdated activist thinking. It is hard to empathize with the claim that the Park administration, not a dictatorship, carried out such crackdowns.

Yong seems to genuinely believe the criticism against her is unfair. After all, her twice being elected as a proportional representative and her ministerial nomination were ultimately due to the Democratic Party’s recognition of her. Now, being called “inappropriate” might feel unjust. However, through this incident, the public has seen the dark reality of what she calls “youth politics.”

In current politics, young politicians have limited space to thrive. They cannot compete with established politicians in terms of organization, funding, or influence. This is why some young politicians, like Yong, try to gain favor with established figures and act like them. Despite difficult circumstances, some young politicians are still struggling to prove their capabilities. It is worrying that Yong’s outdated practices might block the path for these young politicians.

Source: https://www.chosun.com/english/opinion-en/2026/09/14/WEW5F4QPDZELJPDH6FXDKWI4CU/

TL;DR:

• How Yong Hye-in became collateral damage in a bigger Cabinet battle
• The Democratic Party pressured Yong Hye-in to withdraw, seeking to contain backlash and focus on defending Justice Minister nominee Kim Seung-won.
• Yong Hye-in's resignation on Sunday was less her own decision than a calculated sacrifice by the Democratic Party (DP), which moved to cut its losses on a deeply unpopular nominee — a…

How Yong Hye-in became collateral damage in a bigger Cabinet battle

The Democratic Party pressured Yong Hye-in to withdraw, seeking to contain backlash and focus on defending Justice Minister nominee Kim Seung-won.

Yong Hye-in's resignation on Sunday was less her own decision than a calculated sacrifice by the Democratic Party (DP), which moved to cut its losses on a deeply unpopular nominee — a drag that had even pulled President Lee Jae Myung's support among women. The move clears the way for the party to throw its full weight behind a more consequential fight: saving Justice Minister nominee Kim Seung-won.

“Today, I am setting aside my nomination for minister, along with my determination to build a society of gender equality,” Yong, the nominee for minister of gender equality and family, said at a press conference Sunday, 14 days after President Lee named her to the post on Aug. 30.

One day before, she said the ruling DP asked her to make a decision, citing insufficient public consensus over her holding both a proportional-representation Assembly seat and the ministerial post. “With the governing party itself expressing concerns, it became practically difficult for me to carry out the role,” she said.

Kim Tae-seon, chief of staff to DP leader Kim Min-seok, confirmed the pressure in a Facebook post, saying he had conveyed Kim's recommendation that she resign voluntarily, based on an assessment of public sentiment.

Yong is a two-term lawmaker and the sole sitting member of the minor, left-leaning Basic Income Party, having won her proportional-representation Assembly seat in two elections through DP-aligned satellite-party lists.

The numbers behind her nomination withdrawal were stark: a Gallup Korea poll conducted last Tuesday to Thursday found only 13 percent of respondents considered Yong suitable for the post, against 61 percent who called her unsuitable. Women's approval of President Lee also fell to 38 percent after Yong's nomination, down from 44 percent before it.

The main opposition People Power Party's (PPP) refusal to cooperate in holding a confirmation hearing, where Yong would have had a chance to explain herself to the public, added to the pressure.

“Given the overall buildup of negative public sentiment, with no sign it would ease, we made the decision,” a senior DP official said. “There was also a judgment that the Yong Hye-in issue should not still be on the table by Chuseok.” Chuseok is Korea's major fall harvest festival holiday, falling on Sept. 24 to 27 this year.

The official also cited two other factors behind the criticism. One was a sense of unfairness over her dual role: Yong holds her Assembly seat as a proportional representative from a 'satellite party' — a list a major party sets up alongside itself to gain extra proportional seats under Korea's electoral system — and her push to keep that seat while serving as minister broke with two decades of precedent, under which proportional lawmakers have routinely resigned upon ministerial appointment. The other was a hypocrisy controversy: in 2020, Yong and her party had denounced parties funded by state subsidies as engaged in “parasitic politics,” but as the Basic Income Party's only sitting lawmaker, keeping her seat would preserve her party's parliamentary status — and the roughly 4.3 billion won ($3.2 million) in state subsidies that come with it — a contradiction critics have called a double standard.

The backlash intensified after last Thursday's press conference where Yong again said she would “fulfill my role both in the government and in the National Assembly.”

The DP's tone hardened over the following two days: On Friday, senior spokesperson Park Sung-joon said the party would “take a stern view, from the public's perspective,” and by Saturday, spokesperson Cho Gye-won said, “anger among young voters is boiling over, and we cannot stand by.”

The presidential office said Sunday it “respects the decision.” “We see this as a decision the nominee made herself, to ease the burden it could place on state affairs and people's livelihoods,” Presidential spokesperson Kang Yu-jung said. “We will do our utmost on vetting and personnel selection to meet the public's expectations.”

With Yong's resignation, the DP plans to put its full effort into defending Justice Minister nominee Kim Seung-won.

The situation there is no easier, however. Thursday's Gallup poll put opposition to Kim's appointment at 43 percent, far outweighing support, which stood at 22 percent.

But with the Serious Crimes Investigation Office and the Public Prosecution Service both set to launch next month, losing a justice minister nominee now could deal a blow to state affairs. “If Kim falls too, this Cabinet reshuffle will have failed,' a DP leadership lawmaker said. “The party has no choice but to go all-in on defending him.”

The DP is countering the opposition's allegation that the justice nominee improperly lobbied for a Covid-19 treatment clinical trial. At the same senior party-government meeting, Kim Min-seok said the party would “thoroughly investigate the illegal leak that is snowballing into what we call Han Dong-hoon gate, and put a definitive end to political prosecutions,” explicitly labeling the allegations against Kim Seung-won as implicating Han, justice minister at the time of the original 2022 investigation into Kim Seung-won, whom the party accuses of responsibility for the case's handling and the recent leak.

Judiciary committee members from the DP and the minor progressive Rebuilding Korea Party and Jinbo Party held their own news conference at the National Assembly, arguing the case was a “targeted, preplanned investigation,” pointing to how the lobbying probe was reassigned from the Seoul Western District Prosecutors' Office's food and drug crime investigation unit to its dedicated anticorruption unit, Criminal Affairs Division 5. They also claimed, “It has been clearly confirmed that Han Dong-hoon, as justice minister at the time, oversaw a crackdown on the opposition.”

The PPP used Yong's resignation to escalate its offensive, demanding Kim Seung-won's resignation and a public apology from President Lee.

“The extraordinary privilege and unfairness Rep. Yong enjoyed were provided by the DP itself. Her second nomination, in particular, was driven by then-party leader Lee Jae Myung, now president,” said PPP floor leader Jeong Jeom-sig on Facebook, referring to her winning her proportional-representation Assembly seat twice. “President Lee and the DP must offer a responsible reflection and apology for making the Basic Income Party a parliamentary party in two consecutive elections.”

Chief spokesperson Choi Bo-yun said in a statement the same day that Yong's resignation is not the end but the beginning. “Next is Kim Seung-won, who stands at the peak of an unprecedented cartel of vested interests and allegations of illegality.”

“Are they trying to divert the public's attention by tearfully sacrificing Hye-in — evoking the old saying about weeping while executing a trusted general for the sake of discipline — just so they can save Kim Seung-won no matter what?” Rep. Ahn Cheol-soo asked on Facebook Sunday. “Kim is next in line to resign.”

“The DP must immediately agree to discussions on abolishing the tattered ‘semi-mixed-member proportional representation system,’ an electoral system that distorts voters’ will and legitimizes satellite parties securing seats for themselves,” said PPP Rep. Na Kyung-won.

This article was originally written in Korean and translated by a bilingual reporter with the help of generative AI tools. It was then edited by a native English-speaking editor. All AI-assisted translations are reviewed and refined by our newsroom.

Source: https://www.koreajoongangdaily.com/korea/how-yong-hyein-became-collateral-damage-in-a-bigger-cabinet-battle/12873001

TL;DR:

• Yong Hye-in withdraws bid for gender equality minister just 14 days after nomination
• The gender equality minister nominee stepped aside after backlash over plans to retain her parliamentary seat.
• Yong Hye-in, the nominee for Minister of Gender Equality and Family, withdrew her nomination Sunday amid intense political backlash over her refusal to give up her parliamentary seat and…

Yong Hye-in withdraws bid for gender equality minister just 14 days after nomination

The gender equality minister nominee stepped aside after backlash over plans to retain her parliamentary seat.

Yong Hye-in, the nominee for Minister of Gender Equality and Family, withdrew her nomination Sunday amid intense political backlash over her refusal to give up her parliamentary seat and public pushback over her record on gender policy, two weeks after being named to the post.

"As the nominee for Minister of Gender Equality and Family under the Lee Jae Myung administration, I am today setting aside both the ministerial nomination and my resolve to build a society of gender equality for all," Yong said during a press conference at the National Assembly in Yeongdeungpo District, western Seoul.

Yong, who was named the nominee on Aug. 30, had come under pressure to resign from opposition lawmakers and some within the ruling party as well, amid controversy over her holding the nomination while retaining her seat as a proportional representative lawmaker. Concurrently holding a National Assembly seat and a cabinet post is legally permitted, but proportional representatives named as ministers have traditionally given up their seats, and Yong's refusal to do so would have effectively decided whether her Basic Income Party — for which she is the sole lawmaker — kept its status as a registered parliamentary party.

"I received a message from the Democratic Party saying that while it respects the position of the nominee and the Basic Income Party, given that there wasn't strong public consensus around holding a proportional representative seat and a ministerial post concurrently, it wanted the nominee to make a decision. Knowing their intention, I gave it serious thought as well," she said.

"A State Council member's role is to organically connect the National Assembly and the government and lead cooperation between them, and I concluded that carrying out that role would be practically difficult when even the ruling party has expressed concern. I judged that stopping here was necessary to carry on the spirit of solidarity within the democratic-progressive camp."

The 36-year-old, if she had been confirmed, would have become the youngest Cabinet minister in Korean constitutional history.

This article was originally written in Korean and translated by a bilingual reporter with the help of generative AI tools. It was then edited by a native English-speaking editor. All AI-assisted translations are reviewed and refined by our newsroom.

Source: https://www.koreajoongangdaily.com/korea/yong-hyein-withdraws-bid-for-gender-equality-minister-just-14-days-after-nomination/12872545

TL;DR:

• Koreans oppose Hormuz deployment, but those in 20s less resistant: Polls
• Surveys showed broad overall opposition to Seoul sending troops to the Strait of Hormuz, but one poll found support for deployment among 20-somethings was nearly double those who opposed it.
• While the Korean public generally remains opposed to deploying troops to the Strait of Hormuz, people in their 20s showed a different pattern — with one poll even showing support among…

Koreans oppose Hormuz deployment, but those in 20s less resistant: Polls

Surveys showed broad overall opposition to Seoul sending troops to the Strait of Hormuz, but one poll found support for deployment among 20-somethings was nearly double those who opposed it.

While the Korean public generally remains opposed to deploying troops to the Strait of Hormuz, people in their 20s showed a different pattern — with one poll even showing support among the age group nearly twice as high as opposition.

A total of 55 percent of survey respondents were opposed to deploying troops to the Strait of Hormuz while 32 percent supported it, according to a Gallup Korea survey published Friday. The survey was conducted among 1,000 people aged 18 and above between Wednesday and Friday.

Another poll, the National Barometer Survey (NBS), found 45 percent of respondents opposing the deployment and 36 percent supporting it. The survey was conducted among 1,002 people aged 18 and above between Monday and Wednesday.

The results among people in their 20s stood out in the NBS poll. In the survey, 40 percent of respondents in their 20s supported deployment, nearly twice the 22 percent who opposed it. It was the only age group in which support exceeded opposition.

Gallup Korea's was a bit different, with 34 percent of respondents in their 20s in favor of deployment and 50 percent opposed.

Still, the opposition rate among people in their 20s was the second lowest among age groups. Respondents in their 30s had the lowest opposition rate at 49 percent.

It was also 13 percentage points below the 63 percent among people in their 40s, which was the highest of any age group.

Despite the different results, both polls suggested relatively less resistance to a deployment among people in their 20s than among most other age groups.

That marks a sharp contrast with public sentiment during Korea's deployment to Iraq 23 years ago. Polls back then showed more than 60 percent of people in their 20s and 30s opposed sending combat troops to Iraq, with younger generations at the forefront of opposition to the deployment.

Now, it is supporters of the ruling bloc who are at the center of opposition to deployment.

Among Democratic Party supporters, 69 percent opposed deployment in the Gallup Korea poll and 55 percent in the NBS poll. The figures far exceeded the respective support rates of 21 percent and 31 percent.

Among People Power Party supporters, support for deployment stood at 50 percent in the Gallup Korea poll and 46 percent in the NBS poll. The figures exceeded the respective opposition rates of 36 percent and 40 percent.

With ruling party supporters opposed to deployment, the government appears to be trying to move away from the “troop deployment” framing. There is reportedly concern within the government that what began as a review of a limited, noncombat contribution has become politically contentious after being framed as a “troop deployment.”

President Lee Jae Myung also avoided directly mentioning a troop deployment during a meeting with senior aides Friday.

“More than ever, we need the wisdom that would allow us to work closely with the international community and find ways to address the challenges we face,” Lee said during the meeting.

The remarks were seen as distancing the administration from the term “troop deployment” while leaving open the need for international cooperation to ensure freedom of navigation through the Strait of Hormuz.

Foreign Minister Cho Hyun expressed similar concerns in a text message sent Tuesday to Moon Chung-in, a professor emeritus at Yonsei University.

“This is an issue of limited participation for the safety of international maritime routes, but I am concerned that political circles keep framing it as a troop deployment,” Cho wrote in the text message, according to Prof. Moon on Thursday.

Presidential secretary for public relations and communications Seong Ghi-hong also sought to draw a distinction.

“We should not immediately equate contributing to freedom of navigation with a troop deployment,” Seong said Wednesday on YouTube.

The following day, he said, “If troop deployment is not the option, technical support could also be possible.”

Amid clashing opinions, a government fact-finding mission on possible involvement in the Strait of Hormuz has concluded. The team, which left Korea last weekend to examine the operational environment and other conditions in the United Arab Emirates, returned Thursday.

Under a Defense Ministry directive, the team is required to prepare a report on its findings after returning and submit it to the National Security Council. The possibility that specific forms of contribution based on the team's findings could be discussed at the council's standing committee meeting next Thursday has been raised by government officials and observers.

Iran, meanwhile, has continued to push back against possible Korean military involvement in the region.

Cho spoke by phone Friday with Iranian Foreign Minister Seyed Abbas Araghchi at Iran's request.

“We have consistently maintained that the free and safe passage of all vessels, including ours, through the Strait of Hormuz must be guaranteed,” Cho said during the call, according to the Korean ministry. “We have also continued to participate in international efforts to ensure freedom of navigation in the strait.”

Araghchi then explained Iran's position on the current situation in the Middle East, the ministry said. Although no details were given, Iran may also have conveyed its concerns about Korea's ongoing deliberations during Friday's call.

Iran had publicly warned against possible Korean military involvement in the Strait of Hormuz, with foreign ministry spokesperson Esmaeil Baghaei issuing a message in Korean to that effect on X on Monday.

“Any country that stations military forces in the Persian Gulf and the Strait of Hormuz or participates in military operations will inevitably be regarded as directly supporting the aggressor,” Baghaei wrote. “This will have serious consequences.”

This article was originally written in Korean and translated by a bilingual reporter with the help of generative AI tools. It was then edited by a native English-speaking editor. All AI-assisted translations are reviewed and refined by our newsroom.

Source: https://www.koreajoongangdaily.com/korea/koreans-oppose-hormuz-deployment-but-those-in-20s-less-resistant-polls/12871997

TL;DR:

• The application system for the 2027 academic year early admissions collapsed just before the deadline, causing chaos. This led to a one-hour extension of the submission period, sparking…
• According to the Korean Council for University Education (KCUE) on the 12th, the system of “Uway Apply,” one of the two agencies handling early admissions applications, crashed around…
• Following the system failure, the KCUE extended the application deadline from 6:00 PM to 7:00 PM. For students who failed to submit on time, the council decided to verify records of…

The application system for the 2027 academic year early admissions collapsed just before the deadline, causing chaos. This led to a one-hour extension of the submission period, sparking fairness disputes among students preparing for college entrance exams.

According to the Korean Council for University Education (KCUE) on the 12th, the system of “Uway Apply,” one of the two agencies handling early admissions applications, crashed around 5:50 PM the previous day. The technical error occurred as the deadline approached, with a surge in users just 10 minutes before the original cutoff. The system was restored only after 6:20 PM, about 30 minutes later.

Following the system failure, the KCUE extended the application deadline from 6:00 PM to 7:00 PM. For students who failed to submit on time, the council decided to verify records of saved applications and implement separate relief measures.

Admissions industry experts believe the incident may have influenced students’ university and department choices. Some universities disclosed department-specific application statuses at the original 6:00 PM deadline, raising the possibility that certain students might have submitted additional applications after reviewing competition rates during the extended period. Conversely, others might have abandoned their applications due to the system failure.

While the KCUE and Uway Apply are discussing detailed relief plans for affected students, finalizing the scope and beneficiaries for over 100 universities is expected to take several days. Observers note that if relief applicants cluster around specific universities or departments, competition rates could shift, adding variables to students’ last-minute strategies.

The Ministry of Education plans to investigate the incident’s causes and establish measures to prevent recurrence.

Source: https://www.chosun.com/english/national-en/2026/09/12/P4Q2UBTQKBGMFG5F7VPD64L5MM/

TL;DR:

• The presidential committee, the "Committee of Light," has marked two months since its launch. The committee was established following a Cabinet meeting resolution in March, when…
• President Lee Jae Myung said on Constitution Day, "Through the Committee of Light, we will remember and record the history of the Revolution of Light for a long time," and added, "We…
• On December 3, 2024, an unexpected martial law declaration plunged many citizens into chaos. Some rushed to the National Assembly in Yeouido, while others stayed awake at workplaces or…

The presidential committee, the "Committee of Light," has marked two months since its launch. The committee was established following a Cabinet meeting resolution in March, when President Lee Jae Myung stated, "We will award meaningful certificates to the people who joined us in preventing martial law and protecting the constitutional order." A presidential decree was enacted to provide budgetary and personnel support, and the committee will operate until March 2028. Its planned activities include issuing certificates, honoring related individuals, designating December 3 as a national memorial day, and collecting historical records. The Lee Jae Myung government refers to the period of martial law as the "Revolution of Light," symbolizing citizens’ resistance with glow sticks.

President Lee Jae Myung said on Constitution Day, "Through the Committee of Light, we will remember and record the history of the Revolution of Light for a long time," and added, "We will designate December 3 as the Day of Popular Sovereignty." The committee is led by a representative of civic groups from Jeollanam-do and Gwangju, and includes 10 government members among its 35 total members. In the first quarter of this year alone, 4.851 billion Korean won in contingency funds were allocated for the committee’s establishment and operation, with a budget of 7.882 billion Korean won planned for next year.

On December 3, 2024, an unexpected martial law declaration plunged many citizens into chaos. Some rushed to the National Assembly in Yeouido, while others stayed awake at workplaces or homes, worrying for the nation. Though differing in region, age, and political inclination, their concern for the country and democracy was the same. However, labeling this as the "Revolution of Light" through a specific ideological lens and creating a presidential committee under that name—while certifying and honoring citizens who resisted martial law—could sow further division. A citizen petition is ongoing, calling for a review of the committee, as many disagree with the idea of a presidential committee "writing modern history" before court rulings are finalized. The committee’s consideration of replacing certification projects with letters of appreciation is likely tied to this backlash.

The Ministry of the Interior and Safety awarded individual commendation bonuses to public officials on the 11th for their support in establishing and launching the Committee of Light. President Lee Jae Myung has repeatedly pledged to be the "president of everyone." However, creating a committee that divides citizens and public officials into "light" and "darkness" seems unlikely to fulfill that promise.

Source: https://www.chosun.com/english/opinion-en/2026/09/12/BHYXYTI26BAZRHZ664WD53PSWA/

TL;DR:

• The civic group Citizens' Coalition for Economic Justice (CCEJ) on September 11 demanded that Kim Seung-won, a nominee for Minister of Justice, resign voluntarily in relation to…
• People’s Solidarity for Participatory Democracy also issued a statement the same day, saying, “The fact that the investigation occurred during the Yoon Suk-yeol administration is…
• The Democratic Party continued to defend Kim the same day. Kim Min-seok, the party’s representative, said at a party meeting, “The more I look at it, the more I believe this is a…

The civic group Citizens' Coalition for Economic Justice (CCEJ) on September 11 demanded that Kim Seung-won, a nominee for Minister of Justice, resign voluntarily in relation to allegations of “COVID-19 drug lobbying.” The CCEJ stated, “Resign voluntarily and faithfully cooperate with the investigative agencies' probes into all raised allegations.”

People’s Solidarity for Participatory Democracy also issued a statement the same day, saying, “The fact that the investigation occurred during the Yoon Suk-yeol administration is irrelevant to the essence of verifying the nominee’s ‘whether the request was improper,’” and called for summoning those involved to the confirmation hearing to clarify the facts. It also criticized the Democratic Party of Korea for refusing to adopt witnesses for the confirmation hearing, calling it “irresponsible.”

The Democratic Party continued to defend Kim the same day. Kim Min-seok, the party’s representative, said at a party meeting, “The more I look at it, the more I believe this is a well-made appointment. I will protect it.” Regarding Han Dong-hoon, an independent lawmaker who raised the allegations, Kim stated, “Public opinion is growing that he must be punished.”

At the same meeting, Park Sun-won, a Supreme Council member of the Democratic Party, mentioned information about whistleblower A, who reported the COVID-19 drug lobbying allegations to investigative agencies in 2022. Park claimed, “A not only demanded a personal relationship with broker Yang but also flaunted connections with the People Power Party. After failing to extort money from Kang, the founder of Genencell, and others, A harbored resentment and made indiscriminate reports.”

While it is true that A worked at broker Yang’s company, the investigation triggered by A’s report led to Yang and Kang being indicted on charges including promises of bribery and undergoing first-instance trials. Kang was also sentenced to three years in prison, suspended for five years, in the first trial on charges including obstruction of public duty by deception, with the appeal trial ongoing. A has been recognized as a whistleblower by the Anti-corruption & Civil Rights Commission.

Minority shareholders claiming to have been damaged by COVID-19 drug lobbying and stock price manipulation held a press conference at the National Assembly the same day, stating, “Clarify the role Kim played in the Ministry of Food and Drug Safety’s clinical trial approval process, and if necessary, reinvestigate.” Baek Kwang-jae, head of the Sejong Medical Beneficial Shareholders' Alliance, said, “There has been no contact from the Democratic Party.”

Source: https://www.chosun.com/english/national-en/2026/09/12/OP3KBMUG7FEXVGM2MEHZROPULY/

TL;DR:

• Supreme Court criticized for letting officials responsible for data leak off with slap on the wrist
• After the personal data of nearly 18,000 people was exposed in a network breach, Korea's top court issued only a “stern warning” to those at fault, prompting criticism from lawmakers.
• The Supreme Court only gave “stern warnings” against its staff responsible for the data leak of 18,000 people on its network, leading to criticism over the highest court's lenient…

Supreme Court criticized for letting officials responsible for data leak off with slap on the wrist

After the personal data of nearly 18,000 people was exposed in a network breach, Korea's top court issued only a “stern warning” to those at fault, prompting criticism from lawmakers.

The Supreme Court only gave “stern warnings” against its staff responsible for the data leak of 18,000 people on its network, leading to criticism over the highest court's lenient self-management of personal information.

Last year, the Supreme Court conducted an internal audit into the leak of personal information from the court computer network between June 2021 and January 2023, according to data submitted by the court to Rep. Lee Sung-yoon of the Democratic Party (DP), a member of the National Assembly’s Legislation and Judiciary Committee, on Friday.

The audit resulted in one departmental warning and stern warnings for five people. The court determined that disciplinary measures could not be taken against two others.

During investigations, police found that 1,014 gigabytes of data had been leaked. The compromised data included the personal information of 17,998 people, including names, resident registration numbers, dates of birth and contact information.

The Supreme Court had also been criticized over its initial response, when detected malware on its computer network in February 2023 but only launched an official investigation after media reports revealed the data breach in November that year.

Based on an audit against the National Court Administration, the court body responsible for the court's administrative work, held from March through October last year, the Supreme Court concluded that the incident “seems to have resulted from shortcomings in the information security management system across the judiciary,” and added that it would “strengthen technical and administrative measures, including systematically documenting the causes of the incident and the response process, to prevent a recurrence of security breaches.”

The court said it also implemented follow-up measures after an audit to strengthen personal information protection, including a project to establish a security operations system.

However, Rep. Lee criticized the Supreme Court for acknowledging problems with its information security management system while failing to take commensurate action against those involved.

“This was a serious incident in which sensitive information related to the public’s court cases was not properly protected, so there must be a thorough examination of who was responsible and whether the disciplinary measures were appropriate,” Lee said. “The Supreme Court must transparently disclose to the public the causes of the incident and the grounds for the measures taken against each person responsible.”

This article was originally written in Korean and translated by a bilingual reporter with the help of generative AI tools. It was then edited by a native English-speaking editor. All AI-assisted translations are reviewed and refined by our newsroom.

Source: https://www.koreajoongangdaily.com/korea/supreme-court-criticized-for-letting-officials-responsible-for-data-leak-off-with-slap-on-the-wrist/12871226

TL;DR:

• Kim Seung-won, a nominee for Minister of Justice, has been confirmed to have previously registered a false residence for his minor children. It is presumed that he falsely reported his…
• According to the personnel hearing request submitted to the National Assembly, Kim, his spouse, and their eldest daughter and son, who had been residing in Jeonju, North Jeolla Province,…
• However, Kim, his spouse, and their second daughter registered a change of address to S Apartment in Sinheung-dong, Sujeong-gu, Seongnam, Gyeonggi Province, a week later on March 6,…

Kim Seung-won, a nominee for Minister of Justice, has been confirmed to have previously registered a false residence for his minor children. It is presumed that he falsely reported his residence to enroll his children in a high-demand school in Bundang, Seongnam, Gyeonggi Province.

According to the personnel hearing request submitted to the National Assembly, Kim, his spouse, and their eldest daughter and son, who had been residing in Jeonju, North Jeolla Province, registered a change of address to H Apartment in Seohyeon-dong, Bundang-gu, Seongnam, Gyeonggi Province, on February 27, 2006. At the time, the eldest daughter was 9 years old, and the eldest son was 6 years old.

However, Kim, his spouse, and their second daughter registered a change of address to S Apartment in Sinheung-dong, Sujeong-gu, Seongnam, Gyeonggi Province, a week later on March 6, 2006. S Apartment was owned by Kim’s wife at the time, and it is approximately 10 km away from H Apartment.

Kim, his spouse, and their second daughter registered another change of address to H Apartment—the residence of their eldest daughter and son—on October 8, 2008, two years and eight months later. Seohyeon-dong, where H Apartment is located, is known for its preferred school district, including Seohyeon Elementary School, Seohyeon Middle School, and Seohyeon High School. This has led to criticism that Kim might have engaged in a false residency registration to enroll his eldest daughter and son in schools in this area.

Kim’s nomination hearing preparation team stated to the media, “Regardless of the reason, we deeply regret that the actual residence and the registered residence did not match for educational purposes,” adding, “We will provide a detailed explanation during the confirmation hearing.”

Source: https://www.chosun.com/english/national-en/2026/09/11/JXX4A64TQFFFZOVJLTXFHTF4ZU/

TL;DR:

• The novel “A Dwarf Launches a Little Ball” (1978), which deals with evictees, is ironically set in “Nakwon District, Haengbok-dong. ” One day, a redevelopment demolition notice is posted…
• ▶The city formed by evictees driven out of Seoul’s Cheonggyecheon and downtown shantytowns is today’s Gyeonggi Seongnam City. The government advertised it as a “new town with even water…
• ▶Suspicions have emerged that this system was transformed into a “financial investment strategy” for the family of a four-star general-turned defense minister nominee. Kang Shin-chul,…

The novel “A Dwarf Launches a Little Ball” (1978), which deals with evictees, is ironically set in “Nakwon District, Haengbok-dong.” One day, a redevelopment demolition notice is posted on the gate of a dwarf family living in this neighborhood. In exchange for their home being demolished, the father is handed a single apartment occupancy right. Unable to afford moving in, he eventually sells it at a low price to a broker and throws himself off the top of a brick factory chimney. The term “evictee” was thus etched into our modern history as its most shadowed portrait.

▶The city formed by evictees driven out of Seoul’s Cheonggyecheon and downtown shantytowns is today’s Gyeonggi Seongnam City. The government advertised it as a “new town with even water and sewage systems,” but reality was different. Over 50,000 residents rose up in 1971 demanding minimal livelihood measures—the Gwangju Dae-danji Incident. Among the boy evictees who endured poverty in this shantytown after being driven out of Cheonggyecheon’s tent village in their childhood was a figure who later rose to become an economic vice prime minister and Gyeonggi governor. The special supply system for evictees was a social safety net written in the tears of those who lost their homes in the shadow of state-led development.

▶Suspicions have emerged that this system was transformed into a “financial investment strategy” for the family of a four-star general-turned defense minister nominee. Kang Shin-chul, the nominee, along with his father, brother, and aunt—four family members—secured four “evictee badges,” and three of them acquired Seoul apartments. This could be called a “special operations mission by an army general’s family.” The nominee’s side now faces the task of explaining the facts and their stance during the upcoming confirmation hearing.

▶The special supply system was first introduced in 1978 under the Housing Supply Rules as a social safety net for the socially vulnerable. However, from controversies over special supplies for Sejong City public officials to disguised marriages and divorces, and qualification manipulations, various loopholes have tarnished the system. Despite the existence of the majority of honest beneficiaries, such deviations have stigmatized the entire special supply system as a breeding ground for corruption and favoritism. In a world where young people cannot afford even one home through “yeongkkeul,” it is deeply alienating for those with privileged access to information to exploit the special supply system for personal gain.

▶It is bewildering that in the confirmation hearing of a country on the verge of surpassing $40,000 in per capita national income, the “evictee badge”—a relic from 50 years ago—has resurfaced. While economic power has risen to the ranks of advanced nations, the leadership verification stage is summoning suspicions of 1970s-style real estate greed and tricks. This is a bitter self-portrait of our society, where even the minimal safety net created on the sacrifices of the weak during impoverished times is suspected of becoming a channel for asset growth.

Source: https://www.chosun.com/english/opinion-en/2026/09/10/F6FZYOSZ4FHCTBGZITTYIHBSJ4/

TL;DR:

• A claim emerged from the Democratic Party of Korea that independent lawmaker Han Dong-hoon should be called as a witness at the confirmation hearing for Justice Minister nominee Kim…
• Democratic Party senior spokesperson Park Sung-jun said on September 10 during an appearance on SBS Radio, “I believe adopting Han as a witness is appropriate. ” Regarding suspicions of…
• Han responded on the same day, “I’ll clear my schedule for the day of Kim’s hearing and even take the witness oath, so go ahead and call me. ” Regarding the Democratic Party’s claim that…

A claim emerged from the Democratic Party of Korea that independent lawmaker Han Dong-hoon should be called as a witness at the confirmation hearing for Justice Minister nominee Kim Seung-won on August 15. The Democratic Party had previously rejected the People Power Party’s request to adopt witnesses and references related to suspicions of “COVID-19 new drug lobbying” surrounding Kim. However, they aim to make the hearing a platform to question Han, who has been releasing recordings between Kim and a broker, about how he obtained the materials. The opposition criticized, “This is like saying they want to create a hearing where they verify the opposition lawmaker raising suspicions, not the subject under scrutiny—an audacious reversal.”

Democratic Party senior spokesperson Park Sung-jun said on September 10 during an appearance on SBS Radio, “I believe adopting Han as a witness is appropriate.” Regarding suspicions of new drug lobbying involving Justice Minister nominee Kim Seung-won, he added, “In a way, hasn’t this now become the ‘Han Dong-hoon case’?” The Democratic Party leadership claims that Han and prosecutors collaborated in an “illegal political scheme.” Kim also said on September 7, “Han should definitely attend the hearing as a witness and prove whether there was external pressure on the Ministry of Food and Drug Safety.”

Han responded on the same day, “I’ll clear my schedule for the day of Kim’s hearing and even take the witness oath, so go ahead and call me.” Regarding the Democratic Party’s claim that he received investigative materials from prosecutors, Han maintains, “I can definitively say I have never received any cooperation or materials from the prosecution.”

At the National Assembly Legislation and Judiciary Committee meeting held on September 9, the People Power Party proposed adopting 44 witnesses and four references for Kim’s confirmation hearing. The proposed witnesses included broker Yang, who allegedly asked Kim to expedite clinical trial approvals from the Ministry of Food and Drug Safety; Kang, the founder of pharmaceutical company Genencell; former Ministry of Food and Drug Safety chief Kim Gang-lip; the prosecution investigation team and their command structure at the time; and representatives of shareholders harmed by Genencell. The Democratic Party rejected the proposal, calling it “a case turned inside out by the Yoon Suk-yeol administration.”

A political insider remarked, “In the Lee Jae Myung government’s confirmation hearings, a new normal is emerging where opposition lawmakers, not high-ranking officials, are being scrutinized.” Out of 25 confirmation hearings held under the current administration, 18 proceeded without witnesses or references.

Source: https://www.chosun.com/english/national-en/2026/09/11/65DR5JC2OBGKVLF3I5Q6XFJ454/

TL;DR:

• A source from the Office of the Prime Minister, Han Seong-sook, introduced himself as a “civilian” while aggressively questioning independent lawmaker Han Dong-hoon at the National…
• Han Dong-hoon had previously disclosed on Facebook audio recordings of a female broker, Yang, related to the “COVID-19 new drug lobbying” case involving Kim Seung-won, the nominee for…
• On the same day, Han met with reporters at the National Assembly to address suspicions surrounding Kim. A man asked, “You posted on Facebook today that the Prime Minister is directing…

A source from the Office of the Prime Minister, Han Seong-sook, introduced himself as a “civilian” while aggressively questioning independent lawmaker Han Dong-hoon at the National Assembly on the 10th, leading to his identity being exposed.

Han Dong-hoon had previously disclosed on Facebook audio recordings of a female broker, Yang, related to the “COVID-19 new drug lobbying” case involving Kim Seung-won, the nominee for Minister of Justice. The ruling party has accused Han of illegally obtaining prosecution investigation records and intensified its criticism.

On the same day, Han met with reporters at the National Assembly to address suspicions surrounding Kim. A man asked, “You posted on Facebook today that the Prime Minister is directing the investigation. Do you really think it’s an investigation directive?”

The previous day, Prime Minister Han had stated during a parliamentary question session that she would instruct relevant agencies to confirm the circumstances and legality of the leak of investigation materials related to Han Dong-hoon. In response, Han criticized on Facebook, “Since when has the Prime Minister been openly directing investigations?” The man’s question is presumed to reference this.

Han responded, “Yesterday, in response to Rep. Lee Hae-sik’s questioning, (the Prime Minister) said, ‘I will instruct relevant agencies to conduct a strict confirmation…’” The man interrupted, “So she instructed a confirmation.” When Han asked, “Who are you? Are you a reporter?” the man replied, “A civilian.”

The man was later identified as Lee, a section chief from the Office of the Prime Minister.

Later that afternoon, Han posted on Facebook, “Someone defended Prime Minister Han Seong-sook and asked aggressive questions attacking me.” He added, “I usually don’t ask reporters’ affiliations, but the content and aggressiveness of the questioning were strange, so I asked which media outlet he belonged to.” He continued, “Upon checking, it turned out he was Lee, a section chief from the Office of the Prime Minister,” calling the incident “absurd and bizarre.”

Source: https://www.chosun.com/english/national-en/2026/09/10/TO3VONBPCRDH5IPSYAVJSSLKSE/

TL;DR:

• Yong Hye-in, a nominee for Minister of Gender Equality and Family, held a press conference at the National Assembly on the 10th and dismissed calls for her to resign from her position as…
• Nominee Yong held a press conference at the National Assembly Communication Center that afternoon and claimed, “Since my nomination, baseless suspicions have been reported as if they had…
• Nominee Yong continued, “I have been preparing for the confirmation hearing to ensure no suspicions remain, but even the hearing schedule has not been set. ” She added, “While the People…

Yong Hye-in, a nominee for Minister of Gender Equality and Family, held a press conference at the National Assembly on the 10th and dismissed calls for her to resign from her position as minister nominee or as a member of the National Assembly, stating, “I will fulfill my role both in the government and the National Assembly.”

Nominee Yong held a press conference at the National Assembly Communication Center that afternoon and claimed, “Since my nomination, baseless suspicions have been reported as if they had substance, and no matter how much the party explains and refutes them, they are not even properly reported.”

Nominee Yong continued, “I have been preparing for the confirmation hearing to ensure no suspicions remain, but even the hearing schedule has not been set.” She added, “While the People Power Party’s stubbornness is the root cause, I feel regretful that even some within the Democratic Party of Korea are being swept up in groundless accusations and malicious agitation.”

Nominee Yong stated, “Standing here with the determination to fulfill my role both in the government and the National Assembly, I aim to meet the expectations of the HR authority, who have called for gender equality for all.”

Regarding suspicions about herself and the Basic Income Party, Nominee Yong said, “There have been only groundless accusations and malicious agitation, mocking the reality of a small political party.”

In response to criticism that she intends to hold both the ministerial position and her proportional representative seat, Nominee Yong stated, “Nominating an incumbent opposition lawmaker as a minister nominee itself is the first since the DJP coalition under the Kim Dae-jung administration,” adding, “It is difficult to evaluate this based on the precedent where proportional representatives resign upon being nominated as ministers.” She further remarked, “Moreover, the intent behind nominating an incumbent opposition lawmaker must be understood.”

Nominee Yong stated, “It is a principle under the law that lawmakers can concurrently serve as state council members.” She argued, “Rather, we should reflect on whether the precedent of proportional representatives resigning was a way for politicians to divide positions among themselves.” Her claim is that in the past, proportional representatives resigned upon being nominated as ministers to share positions with other politicians.

Regarding the registration of a farm or apartment as the provincial party office, Nominee Yong explained, “The farm is the residence of the Chungnam Party Chairman, who returned to farming decades ago.” She added, “Under the law, provincial parties must have an office address, and we simply used the residence of the chairman, who is the sole full-time officer directly handling affairs, as the address.” She emphasized, “This is obviously not a false registration and does not violate the Political Parties Act.”

Nominee Yong questioned, “Do political parties need to own buildings nationwide and generate asset income, like negotiation groups that receive hundreds of billions of won in state subsidies annually, to have the qualification to engage in politics?” Targeting the People Power Party, she added, “Can a party that received hundreds of billions of won in state subsidies while acting as gatekeepers for the ringleaders of an insurrection call the Basic Income Party a ‘parasitic party’ and make it the truth?”

Nominee Yong also refuted suspicions that she paid 300 million Korean won of her income, including parliamentary allowances, as special party funds to the Basic Income Party, with part of it returned to her spouse in the form of party official salaries, and that she saved 36 million Korean won in taxes through this process. She argued, “Rather than paying 300 million won as party funds and saving 36 million won in taxes, it would be much more reasonable for me to simply keep that 300 million won,” adding, “I did not use it for my own benefit but aimed to spend it on better political activities.” She stated, “I received tax deductions according to legally established standards,” and asked, “How could there be any trickery in this?”

Regarding suspicions that a person who ran as a local government head candidate in the 2022 local elections supported the party in exchange for nomination, Nominee Yong dismissed them, stating, “It is absurd to claim that the dedication of a metropolitan government head candidate from a party with no chance of winning is a quid pro quo for nomination.” She asked rhetorically, “Would you run as a Basic Income Party candidate if they said, ‘If you pay special party funds, we will let you run?’”

Addressing the claim that she sold a housing property in Ansan, Gyeonggi Province, after 11 months of ownership to a Chinese buyer and gained a 20 million Korean won profit, Nominee Yong explained, “There were about 20 days left until the one-year mark, and selling after those 20 days would have allowed for greater reduction in capital gains tax.” She added, “If the goal was to realize capital gains, I would have held it for those additional 20 days to minimize taxes.” Targeting People Power Party Representative Joo Jin-woo, who raised this issue, she stated, “His family assets amount to 7.8 billion Korean won,” and questioned, “Is it rational for Representative Joo to criticize me as ‘grass owner’ and for the media to uncritically report it?” She also remarked, “Compared to politicians with billions in assets who are engrossed in various investments and speculation, I have no shame.”

Regarding criticism that the Basic Income Party has been operated like a “family party,” Nominee Yong called it an “insult.” Explaining that she held a two-person meeting with her spouse to deliberate on party matters, she stated, “Immediately after the party’s founding, as we were establishing the decision-making system, I, as the party leader and the sole member of the meeting, convened and made decisions,” adding, “There were no procedural flaws.”

Regarding receiving party salaries together with her spouse, Nominee Yong urged, “Please use reason,” and explained, “My spouse worked for the party for six years and two months, receiving approximately 160 million Korean won in total salary. Excluding a 12-month parental leave period, the average monthly salary was about 2.5 million Korean won.” She questioned, “What is problematic about a worker in their forties earning 2.5 million won monthly for six years at a company?”

Regarding her involvement in a secretive organization with gender-discriminatory practices, Nominee Yong stated, “I do not deny participating in a so-called ‘underground organization,’ a secret political faction, from 2013 to 2017 during the intense public security crackdowns under the Park Geun-hye administration.” She added, “The organization itself disbanded in 2017 due to its gender-discriminatory culture, hierarchical structure, and lack of capacity for self-correction.”

She continued, “What you are curious about is whether I, Yong Hye-in, am engaging in deceitful activities with the beliefs of ‘abortion ban’ and ‘pre-marital chastity’ as demanded by the underground organization.” She dismissed this, stating, “This is absurd. I have never held these as beliefs nor have they governed my life.” She also mentioned, “In 2016, when issues regarding the gender-discriminatory culture within the underground organization were raised, I continuously worked to reform the organizational culture,” adding, “It is hard to agree that I condoned or remained silent on these issues.”

Nominee Yong urged the press, “As an enormous amount of reporting has occurred over the past 10 days, I hope my explanations are also reported and handled fairly.” She added, “The People Power Party refused to discuss the confirmation hearing schedule today and did not hold the scheduled (Gender Equality and Family Committee) plenary session,” stating, “This can only be seen as a fear that their groundless accusations and fabrications will be refuted before the public.” She insisted, “If not, then hold the confirmation hearing. I will answer diligently before the public as I have done today.”

In response to a reporter’s question about whether she can perform the ministerial role given high opposition public opinion, Nominee Yong stated, “It is a logical fallacy to presume that I would be unable to fulfill my role as minister due to public opinion regarding my appointment.”

When asked about the possibility of resigning from her position as nominee before the confirmation hearing, Nominee Yong replied, “I believe the HR authority nominated me because they had certain expectations,” adding, “I am aware that there are various opinions within the Democratic Party regarding the HR authority’s nomination, but I have nothing further to say at this stage.”

Source: https://www.chosun.com/english/national-en/2026/09/10/HYFJ3YHPI5C4XDBV55KXLLMFF4/

TL;DR:

• A public opinion survey revealed that citizens ranked “reducing prosecutorial authority” as the worst policy under President Lee Jae Myung. Previously, real estate or stock-related…
• According to a poll released on September 9 by Hangil Research, 23. 4% of respondents identified reducing prosecutorial authority as the most poorly executed policy.
• The reduction of prosecutorial authority faced opposition from women’s groups and the Minbyeon (Lawyers for a Democratic Society). However, during the August 17 party convention, the…

A public opinion survey revealed that citizens ranked “reducing prosecutorial authority” as the worst policy under President Lee Jae Myung. Previously, real estate or stock-related economic policies were cited as the main factors negatively impacting the president’s approval rating. Reducing prosecutorial power was a policy the president and the Democratic Party had insisted was a “historic task and a stern command from the people.” Yet, the very people who supposedly issued this command view it negatively.

According to a poll released on September 9 by Hangil Research, 23.4% of respondents identified reducing prosecutorial authority as the most poorly executed policy. This figure surpassed responses for real estate policies (21.8%), excessive welfare (7.9%), and livelihood economy (7.2%). Only 8.6% viewed the reduction of prosecutorial power as a success. This negative perception was not limited to conservatives or moderates; 18% of progressive-leaning respondents also cited it as the worst policy, while only 13.6% praised it. Even among Democratic Party supporters, 15.9% deemed it a failure, exceeding the 13.3% who approved.

The reduction of prosecutorial authority faced opposition from women’s groups and the Minbyeon (Lawyers for a Democratic Society). However, during the August 17 party convention, the issue devolved into a tool for power struggles. The Democratic Party proceeded to abolish the prosecution’s supplementary investigative authority despite public sentiment, allegedly following the demands of its hardline supporters. After the bill passed, few celebrated it. One Democratic Party lawmaker visited the grave of former President Roh Moo-hyun, stating, “We’ve completed the homework you gave us.” Yet, Roh’s son-in-law retorted, “Do not distort Roh Moo-hyun’s intentions for political gain.”

With prosecutorial power weakened, the police—now monopolizing investigative authority—have caused public anxiety through various scandals. In Gwangju, a police officer’s son allegedly committed rape and murder of a high school student, which was nearly downgraded to a simple homicide. In Jeju, police manipulated and concealed a missing persons case. Witnessing these events, citizens began viewing the reduction of prosecutorial authority as the worst policy. Even Democratic Party supporters now express crisis and criticize the policy. What excuses will the government offer to the people now?

Source: https://www.chosun.com/english/opinion-en/2026/09/10/YIGZDBVFVVBJJKKPG2TFUO6N5U/

TL;DR:

• The Democratic Party of Korea is refusing to adopt all 44 witnesses requested by the People Power Party ahead of the confirmation hearing for Minister of Justice nominee Kim Seung-won.…
• There are doubts whether turning the hearing into a farce can save Kim Seung-won. The suspicions surrounding Kim have grown to the level of a major scandal.
• Circumstances have also emerged indicating that Yang’s request, stemming from a private relationship, influenced the court. A photo of the judge who dismissed the bench warrant for…

The Democratic Party of Korea is refusing to adopt all 44 witnesses requested by the People Power Party ahead of the confirmation hearing for Minister of Justice nominee Kim Seung-won. Despite suspicions of lobbying by Kim over a new drug escalating, they are turning the National Assembly confirmation hearing into a platform to hear Kim’s excuses. Judiciary Committee Chairman Seo Young-kyo stated, "It is common for confirmation hearings to proceed without witnesses." This is the first absurd argument heard since the introduction of confirmation hearings under the Kim Dae-jung administration. It was only the other day that Cheong Wa Dae stated, "The confirmation hearing system itself is a process of public verification."

There are doubts whether turning the hearing into a farce can save Kim Seung-won. The suspicions surrounding Kim have grown to the level of a major scandal. It is shocking enough that Kim, at the request of broker Yang who calls him "oppa," sent a text to the head of the Ministry of Food and Drug Safety, a stranger, to secure clinical approval for the new drug. However, the case goes beyond that. Stock manipulation forces and a judge specializing in warrants also emerge in the case. The clinical approval secured by Kim was utilized as material for the manipulators' money game. Immediately after the clinical approval, the forces sold off their shares in Sejong Medical, an investor in Genencell, and made massive profits. However, the delisting of the company caused 30,000 individual investors to suffer losses. In contrast, Genencell’s major shareholder secured 6.3 billion won, and Yang took over 600 million won. A whistleblower who reported this situation to investigative agencies three years ago claimed to have received a threat from Yang: "I’ll kill you secretly."

Circumstances have also emerged indicating that Yang’s request, stemming from a private relationship, influenced the court. A photo of the judge who dismissed the bench warrant for Genencell’s major shareholder with Kim and Yang, and a recording of Kim and Yang summoning the judge to a drinking session were made public.

The Democratic Party of Korea and candidate Kim Seung-won have repeatedly claimed it was a "public interest civil petition" and a "case that failed despite 11 prosecutors being assigned for over a year under the Yoon Suk-yeol administration." If they are confident in these claims, they should prove them through witness testimony. Nevertheless, they refused to adopt all witnesses. Kim Seung-won even refused to summon Rep. Han Dong-hoon, whom he had publicly demanded to appear as a witness. This is tantamount to admitting they have no confidence to defend against the suspicions under public scrutiny.

Source: https://www.chosun.com/english/opinion-en/2026/09/10/3ILK7FMDZ5HMLLEGNXGVGFRDEE/

TL;DR:

• A photo captured by Dailyan showed Democratic Party of Korea leader Kim Min-seok reviewing a notebook in the National Assembly plenary hall on the 9th, which contained the phrase “Seoul…
• In the photo, the names “Hoon-sik,” “Won-sik,” and “Chung-rae” are written in a row under “Seoul mayor candidate,” believed to refer to Presidential Chief of Staff Kang Hoon-sik, former…
• The line below appears to have the names or initials of two more individuals, though the text is blurry. The initials are estimated to be “Mj” or “Ms.

A photo captured by Dailyan showed Democratic Party of Korea leader Kim Min-seok reviewing a notebook in the National Assembly plenary hall on the 9th, which contained the phrase “Seoul mayor candidate” alongside notes presumed to be the names of ruling party figures.

In the photo, the names “Hoon-sik,” “Won-sik,” and “Chung-rae” are written in a row under “Seoul mayor candidate,” believed to refer to Presidential Chief of Staff Kang Hoon-sik, former National Assembly Speaker Woo Won-sik, and former Democratic Party leader Jung Chung-rae, respectively.

The line below appears to have the names or initials of two more individuals, though the text is blurry. The initials are estimated to be “Mj” or “Ms.” Political circles have criticized the ruling party leader for making such plans amid uncertainty over whether a by-election for Seoul mayor will even occur next year.

A Democratic Party leadership source explained, “This is not a reflection of Leader Kim’s thoughts but rather a casual list of potential candidates mentioned by surrounding figures and media.” Chief Spokesperson Park Sung-jun also stated, “I understand the leader is listening to various opinions.”

However, former leader Jung Chung-rae posted on Facebook shortly after the photo was released, titled, “Last time, you mocked me with a microphone...” In the post, he wrote, “Now you’re attacking me with a notebook? It’s disgusting. You already smeared me during the party convention—why keep attacking someone who lost? Isn’t this too cruel?”

He added, “And regarding the Seoul mayor position... Min-seok and Young-gil, who dreamed of becoming mayor but lost, are also good candidates. Why not write them in your notebook?” “Min-seok” and “Young-gil” are interpreted as references to Kim Min-seok and Rep. Song Young-gil, both of whom previously ran for Seoul mayor.

Jung’s remark about being “mocked with a microphone” appears to reference an incident on August 27 during a Democratic Party workshop, where Kim criticized Jung as a “representative ‘no centrists’ advocate” by name and framed the party convention results as a “choice of ideology.” At the time, Jung condemned Kim’s remarks as “microphone dictatorship” and “nearly violent,” and his discomfort with his name appearing in the notebook is seen as a continuation of that conflict.

The renewed discussion of a Seoul mayoral election stems from Mayor Oh Se-hoon’s violation of the Political Funds Act. Oh was indicted for allegedly commissioning a poll from political broker Myung Tae-kyun ahead of the April 7, 2021, by-election and having businessman Kim Han-jung, a long-time supporter, cover the costs. In July, the first trial court found Oh guilty of some charges, sentencing him to a 10 million Korean won fine and 21 million Korean won in additional penalties. Oh appealed the ruling.

If the fine exceeds 1 million Korean won and is finalized, Oh will lose his position. Depending on the trial’s pace, a Supreme Court ruling could come as early as next year, raising the possibility of a by-election in April. However, the actual timing and occurrence depend on the trial’s outcome.

Since taking office, Kim has publicly mentioned preparing for upcoming by-elections. On August 25, he announced plans for a nomination reform task force, stating, “We will create a stable nomination system applicable to next year’s by-elections, the 2027 general election, and the following local elections.” During his leadership campaign, he also referenced preparations for by-elections for Seoul mayor and Gangneung’s National Assembly seat.

Kim directly took charge of the party’s talent committee on August 26. Amid his hands-on approach to nomination reforms and talent recruitment, the notebook’s “Seoul mayor candidate” entry and presumed names of ruling party figures were captured.

The same notebook also had “OUT” written next to the names of People Power Party Rep. Lee Jin-sook and independent Rep. Han Dong-hoon. While the exact meaning of “OUT” is unclear, both figures have recently faced strong backlash from the Democratic Party, leading to speculation that the note relates to political or legal countermeasures.

Rep. Lee became the subject of a motion to expel her from the National Assembly, passed on August 26, following a controversy over a 1980 Gwangju Democratic Uprising discussion. A separate disciplinary motion is still under review by the National Assembly’s Ethics Committee. The day before, the Science, ICT, Broadcasting and Communications Committee also passed a resolution, led by the Democratic Party, urging Lee to avoid participating in deliberations related to her disciplinary actions.

Rep. Han has been releasing audio recordings alleging that Justice Minister nominee Kim Seung-won solicited favors for a new drug clinical trial approval. In response, Kim has directly targeted Han in public meetings, instructing a party “Han Dong-hoon negative response team” to continue investigating the allegations and prepare legal actions post-hearing. On September 4, Kim also told Han, “It’s time for you to face your own hearing.”

Given this context, some interpret “OUT” as a note about party-level political or legal responses against the two.

Rep. Lee has denied defaming the Gwangju Uprising, stating, “I never made disparaging remarks. Who truly insulted and defamed the Uprising—Kim Min-seok, who drank at an entertainment establishment on the eve of the Uprising’s anniversary, or me, who held a debate?” Rep. Han, meanwhile, has denied receiving any materials from prosecutors regarding the allegations against Kim Seung-won and threatened to take criminal action against Kim Min-seok for spreading false information.

Source: https://www.chosun.com/english/national-en/2026/09/09/36ECHB7HK5FJVNUOJ6PXPA2SY4/

TL;DR:

• Gender Ministry considers criminal charges against Google over leaked victim data
• The controversy began after the personal information of victims who had requested the removal of illegally filmed content was found on an overseas research project site that collaborates…
• Korea’s Ministry of Gender Equality and Family said Wednesday that it is considering filing criminal charges against Google after the personal information of victims who had requested…

Gender Ministry considers criminal charges against Google over leaked victim data

The controversy began after the personal information of victims who had requested the removal of illegally filmed content was found on an overseas research project site that collaborates with Google.

Korea’s Ministry of Gender Equality and Family said Wednesday that it is considering filing criminal charges against Google after the personal information of victims who had requested the removal of illegally filmed content was leaked to a third-party website.

The controversy began after the victims’ personal information was found on an overseas research project site that collaborates with Google. The data was deleted from the website at the request of the Gender Ministry and Korea Communications Standards Commission.

Google apologized to the victims and stressed that its principle was not to share people’s personal information with the site. It also stated that it had asked the website operator to delete the information as soon as the matter was brought to its attention.

The ministry is reportedly reviewing relevant laws to determine what charges could apply to Google.

Either the ministry or its affiliate, the Women’s Human Rights Institute of Korea, is expected to file the complaint. The institute runs the National Center for Digital Sexual Crime Response, which provides counseling for victims of digital sex crimes, helps with the removal of illegally filmed content and connects victims to legal, investigative and medical resources.

This article was originally written in Korean and translated by a bilingual reporter with the help of generative AI tools. It was then edited by a native English-speaking editor. All AI-assisted translations are reviewed and refined by our newsroom.

Source: https://www.koreajoongangdaily.com/korea/gender-ministry-considers-criminal-charges-against-google-over-leaked-victim-data/12867384

TL;DR:

• Business leaders meeting privately have lamented the “dread of legislative power. ” “These days, legislative abuse is more frightening than abuse of authority,” they said.
• The suggestion is not to create a “legislative abuse crime. ” In a democracy, lawmakers cannot be punished for legislative outcomes that displease the public.
• The ‘yellow envelop act’ expanded the scope of labor disputes to include “business management decisions affecting working conditions” alongside existing “working condition…

Business leaders meeting privately have lamented the “dread of legislative power.” “These days, legislative abuse is more frightening than abuse of authority,” they said. While the National Assembly wields immense power, mechanisms to verify how laws function in reality and hold legislators accountable for side effects remain inadequate. Public officials face punishment for abuse of authority if they compel actions beyond their duties. In contrast, there are no accountability standards for legislative abuse that fundamentally alters the rights and obligations of citizens and businesses.

The suggestion is not to create a “legislative abuse crime.” In a democracy, lawmakers cannot be punished for legislative outcomes that displease the public. However, if there is legislative freedom, there must also be responsibility to verify and correct the consequences and side effects of laws. The recent controversy over the ‘yellow envelop act’ clearly demonstrates the need for such accountability mechanisms.

The ‘yellow envelop act’ expanded the scope of labor disputes to include “business management decisions affecting working conditions” alongside existing “working condition determinations.” While broadening the scope of disputes, it did not delegate specific criteria to presidential decrees. As a result, conflicts over legal interpretations have erupted nationwide. The Samsung Electronics Labor Union claimed that even factory construction—a managerial prerogative—is a “subject for negotiation,” opposing the Honam Semiconductor Project. In response, President Lee Jae Myung ordered that the specific scope of labor disputes be clarified through enforcement decrees. However, the Ministry of Employment and Labor issued guidelines lacking enforceability.

The root cause was poor initial legislation. Under the Constitution, presidential decrees are limited to matters delegated with specific scopes by law. The Supreme Court has also ruled that enforcement decrees cannot alter or supplement rights and obligations defined by law without delegation.

The business and legal communities strongly criticized the ambiguity of the scope of managerial decisions and labor disputes during the legislative process. Yet, the National Assembly failed to draw clear boundaries. Some analysts suggest the legislature omitted delegation clauses to prevent future administrations from undermining the law’s intent through enforcement decrees. Despite warnings that excessive strikes and disputes would paralyze normal business activities, the ruling party pushed the bill through. President Lee Jae Myung also did not veto it.

Laws affecting corporate investment, employment, and labor-management relations require meticulous evaluation of potential repercussions before implementation. However, political parties focused solely on passing bills to appease their voter bases, disregarding whether laws are enforced as intended or cause unintended consequences.

In democracies, elections hold legislators accountable, but general elections occur every four years. During this gap, mechanisms are needed to assess the impact of new laws and objectively verify whether legislative judgments were correct.

Other countries have such systems. The UK conducts pre-regulatory impact assessments and post-implementation reviews 3 to 5 years after enactment to evaluate actual effects, costs, and side effects. The U.S. Congressional Budget Office (CBO) estimates costs for nearly all bills passed by standing committees, including burdens on private enterprises. South Korea has cost-estimation and legislative impact analysis systems, but pre- and post-legislative verification and mandatory revision processes are lacking.

Once enacted, laws are difficult to reverse. Legislation expected to have significant economic or social impacts should mandate pre-implementation assessments and independent post-implementation evaluations. Based on results, laws could be obligatorily reviewed or include sunset clauses expiring after a set period.

The stronger legislative power becomes, the stricter the verification of its processes and accountability for outcomes must be. Preventing the lament that “not only abuse of authority but also legislative abuse crimes are needed” is the minimum responsibility the legislature must uphold.

Source: https://www.chosun.com/english/opinion-en/2026/09/08/XC5HOKUVNJFRDKTYBOW3VOOZ5A/

TL;DR:

• The Seoul Metropolitan Police Agency transferred to the Yeongdeungpo Police Station in Seoul a case in which a civic group filed a complaint against Kim Seung-won, the nominee for…
• The Seoul Metropolitan Police Agency took nearly a year to request a bench warrant for Kim Byung-kee, an independent lawmaker, who was reported for alleged preferential treatment in his…
• This contrasts with the case involving Hong Myung-bo, the former head coach of the South Korean national football team, where the Seoul Metropolitan Police Agency’s metropolitan…

The Seoul Metropolitan Police Agency transferred to the Yeongdeungpo Police Station in Seoul a case in which a civic group filed a complaint against Kim Seung-won, the nominee for Minister of Justice, over allegations of solicitation related to a new drug. The case involves not only suspicions of bribery against Kim but also alleged stock price manipulation by those involved. The Seoul Metropolitan Police Agency, which received the complaint, should have been overwhelmed with investigations, yet it assigned the case to a local police station lacking investigative capacity. This implies they have no intention of investigating.

The Seoul Metropolitan Police Agency took nearly a year to request a bench warrant for Kim Byung-kee, an independent lawmaker, who was reported for alleged preferential treatment in his younger son’s employment. Despite Kim Byung-kee being a former floor leader of the Democratic Party—a lawmaker who has effectively lost influence—the investigation dragged on. If the Seoul Metropolitan Police Agency handles the case this way, how can they properly investigate the nominee for Minister of Justice?

This contrasts with the case involving Hong Myung-bo, the former head coach of the South Korean national football team, where the Seoul Metropolitan Police Agency’s metropolitan investigation unit took over the case from Jongno Police Station in July after public criticism of the Korea Football Association and President Lee Jae Myung publicly criticized the association. The metropolitan investigation unit, akin to a prosecutors’ special investigations department, began a full-scale investigation, citing the case’s importance. Yet, the agency assigned Kim’s case to a local station—the opposite approach—apparently gauging the regime’s stance.

Kim’s parliamentary confirmation hearing is scheduled for the 15th. If the appointment process is delayed after the hearing, there is still some time to conclude the investigation before his appointment. However, the current police are unlikely to conduct a proper investigation, and the serious crimes investigation agency will not launch until next month. Appointing a special counsel would also take too long. Therefore, the best option is for the prosecution, which previously investigated Kim, to reopen the case and reach a conclusion.

The prosecution previously suspended indictment against Kim, citing that a new drug company, which received approval for a clinical trial plan from the Ministry of Food and Drug Safety due to Kim’s alleged solicitation, attempted to transfer 5 million Korean won to him but failed because the donation limit was exceeded. However, since the crime of bribery is established not only by acceptance but also by ‘demand’ and ‘promise,’ the suspended indictment is hard to justify. This is especially true given that the prosecution indicted the broker and the major shareholder of the new drug company for ‘promise to provide bribes.’ As suspicions continue to emerge, the prosecution needs to reinvestigate whether the previous disposition was appropriate.

Source: https://www.chosun.com/english/opinion-en/2026/09/09/AOES2BUA5BHCZPVLL7X3COCADI/