Democratic Party of Korea leadership contenders clashed hard in their second televised debate. The topic was similar to the first debate held on the 29th, but the atmosphere was more intense. In connection with alleged Shincheonji interference in the party convention, they mentioned "ethics inspection," and there was also criticism that leadership was lacking for a ruling party leader.
Democratic Party candidates Song Young-gil, Jung Chung-rae, and Kim Min-seok (in ballot order) held the "second televised debate for party leader candidates" on the afternoon of the 5th at KBS in Yeouido, Seoul.
Jung Chung-rae and Kim Min-seok, who had a close contest in the regional primaries in the Chungcheong area and PK (Busan, Ulsan, South Gyeongsang) on the 1st and 2nd, launched an intense war of nerves as soon as the debate began. The topics were the truth battles over "Shincheonji interference in the party convention" and "May handling of the Criminal Procedure Act," which they had bickered over.
Regarding the alleged Shincheonji interference, Jung said, "Victory in the 23rd general election is the essence of this party convention, but by dragging in Shincheonji, we are continually facing suspicions that we violated the principle of separation of church and state guaranteed by Article 20, Paragraph 2 of the Constitution," adding, "This is an act against the party, and to resolve this, if I become party leader, I will have the Ethics Inspection Team investigate Rep. Kim Min-seok."
Kim responded, "Does saying 'it looks like a fire might break out' make someone an arsonist? I did not say our party brought in Shincheonji; I meant there were concerns about Shincheonji interfering in the primary," and added, "In fact, something similar happened in 2022, and afterward Kim Ou-joon and Park Si-young raised suspicions of Shincheonji interference, and candidate Lee Jae-myung expressed agreement."
Jung placed responsibility for single-stock leveraged exchange-traded funds (ETFs) on Kim. He said that during Kim's tenure as prime minister, single-stock leveraged ETFs were introduced without a party-government consultation, increasing stock market volatility. Jung then asked Song for his view.
Song said, "Regarding leveraged ETFs, the fact there was no party-government consultation with Jung as party leader means there was no trust," adding, "And when problems arise, a party leader should not shift responsibility to the prime minister or the president; even if it feels unfair, the leader must take responsibility, explain, and seek understanding. That is the stance of a ruling party."
Jung then continued his offensive against Song. Jung said, "(If Song had been party leader) you would not have carried out prosecutorial reform. I did it with a strong mentality." In response to Jung's remarks, Song said, "You talk about mentality, but is there any politician who fights like I do even when attacked by prosecutors?" and added, "Speak with respect for the other side."
The conflict between Kim and Jung exploded in the latter part of the debate. Regarding the June 3 local elections, Kim said, "When did the party, government, and Blue House define it as a victory? Just because the president is not here, do you run your mouth?" Jung replied, "Don't get angry; please ask your question."
In response to Kim's question, "Why did you delay handling the Criminal Procedure Act amendment?" Jung said, "How shameless," and "Wow, that's something." He added, "We held a debate on May 6, and May 21 was the official local election campaign period," and asked, "Why did you not make the request to the party leader and the floor leader?"