[AK Radio] Jo Taeyong vs Hong Jangwon, Jo Taeyong "Hong Jangwon's Memo Differs from Facts"

"At the Time, Former Deputy Director Hong Was in the Office, Not the Official Residence"
"No Cabinet Members Supported Emergency Martial Law"

Cho Tae-yong, Director of the National Intelligence Service, appeared at the 8th hearing of the Constitutional Court on the 13th and claimed regarding the "Hong Jang-won Memo," a key issue in President Yoon Seok-yeol's impeachment case, that "there are four types of memos, and former Deputy Director Hong Jang-won's testimony is inconsistent with the facts." He directly refuted the circumstances of the memo's creation as testified by former Deputy Director Hong at the 5th hearing on the 4th.

At that time, former Deputy Director Hong testified, "Around 11:06 p.m. on December 3, I received a list of politicians to be arrested, dictated by Counterintelligence Commander Yeo In-hyung, in a dark open space in front of the National Intelligence Service Director's official residence, and wrote it down." This testimony has been highlighted as a key piece of evidence in President Yoon Seok-yeol's impeachment trial. However, Director Cho raised doubts about the credibility of this testimony, stating, "After reviewing the CCTV footage, former Deputy Director Hong was in the National Intelligence Service office building at that time." Furthermore, Director Cho revealed that in addition to the two known types of memos, two more types exist.

※ For more details, please click the video.

Until now, the known memos were two types: one directly written by former Deputy Director Hong and another transcribed by his aide. Former Deputy Director Hong had stated that because he hurriedly wrote the memo and it was difficult to read, he instructed his aide to transcribe it in the office. However, Director Cho said that there are two additional memos: one created on the afternoon of December 4, when former Deputy Director Hong asked his aide to rewrite it from memory, and another version of the memo with counterintelligence markings and colored circles added.

On this day, Director Cho also raised concerns about former Deputy Director Hong's political neutrality. Referring to an incident at the National Assembly Intelligence Committee last summer, he said that an opposition party lawmaker accused former Deputy Director Hong of making seven personnel requests through influential figures during his tenure at the National Intelligence Service. This was presented as evidence questioning Hong's political neutrality. The lawmaker in question, Park Ji-won of the Democratic Party, stated on social media (SNS) that "Hong did not make requests directly to me; a former National Intelligence Service official who served as Ambassador to the UK made 6 to 7 requests, all of which I rejected."

On the 13th, Cho Tae-yong, the Director of the National Intelligence Service, is attending and testifying at the 8th impeachment trial hearing.

Meanwhile, Director Cho made two important statements related to the main issues of the impeachment trial. First, he acknowledged that on December 3-4, he heard from former Deputy Director Hong that "Lee Jae-myung, Han Dong-hoon, and others could be arrested." However, he regarded this as "a fanciful story" at the time and added, "It would have been better if it had been reported in a way that was understandable." This can be interpreted as acknowledging the existence of statements about the arrest of politicians while drawing a line regarding their specificity and feasibility. This part is expected to be an important clue in understanding the substance of the political arrest plan, which is one of the core issues of the impeachment grounds.

Second, regarding the emergency martial law-related Cabinet meeting on December 3, he testified that "no Cabinet members voted in favor." This directly contradicts the testimonies of former Minister of the Interior and Safety Lee Sang-min and former Minister of National Defense Kim Yong-hyun, who stated that "some Cabinet members voted in favor." This is expected to intensify controversy over the nature and proceedings of the Cabinet meeting at that time. Especially, the content and atmosphere of the discussions at the Cabinet meeting can be an important criterion for judging the grounds for impeachment, and the conflicting testimonies are likely to be a significant variable in the Constitutional Court's future judgment.

On February 4th, Hong Jang-won, former 1st Deputy Director of the National Intelligence Service, appeared at the impeachment trial and gave a statement.

Director Cho's testimony can be broadly divided into parts questioning the credibility of former Deputy Director Hong's testimony and statements directly related to the grounds for impeachment. In particular, while acknowledging that there were statements related to the arrest of politicians, he presented a new interpretation of the situation at the time and showed a position contrary to existing testimonies regarding the Cabinet meeting proceedings.

Through this testimony, the controversy surrounding the Hong Jang-won Memo has become more complex. While the existence of the memo itself is acknowledged, testimonies diverge over the circumstances of its creation and the truthfulness of its contents, drawing attention to how this will affect the Constitutional Court's judgment in the future. Especially, with the newly raised issue of former Deputy Director Hong's political neutrality, debates over the reliability of the testimonies are expected to intensify further.