Supreme Court justice nominee Kim Sung-su said on the 11th that even if the president or a prominent politician is a defendant, they must receive a fair trial in the same way as ordinary citizens, in accordance with procedures and standards set by the Constitution and laws.
Kim gave this answer in a written response submitted that day to Joo Jin-woo of the People Power Party, a member of the National Assembly's special committee for the Supreme Court justice confirmation hearing, to the question, "Do you think the same trial procedures and standards should apply to the president or prominent politicians as to ordinary citizens?"
Kim said, "In the case of the president, there are separate provisions that take into account the constitutional status and the particularity of the duties, such as Article 84 of the Constitution, so in such cases, judgment should be made as prescribed by the Constitution."
On the question, "Do you think a criminal trial that began before a presidential inauguration should continue during the presidential term?" Kim said, "I believe this requires a legal interpretation of the meaning and scope of 'prosecution' in Article 84 of the Constitution."
He added, "However, this is an issue related to a specific case currently pending in court, and it is a judicial matter to be decided by the panel in charge through constitutional interpretation."
He also answered that whether it is constitutionally permissible to stipulate by law that existing criminal trials be suspended during a presidential term is a matter of how to interpret the constitutional term "prosecution."
He continued, "As this could relate to a case currently pending in court, please understand that, as a Supreme Court justice nominee, it is not appropriate for me to state a specific opinion." He gave a similar response to the question of whether, as a rule, a criminal trial halted due to a presidential inauguration should resume immediately upon leaving office.
He drew a line on whether courts can adjust the timing of sentencing or the speed of trials in particular criminal cases because of their major political or social repercussions. Kim said, "In cases that draw significant public attention, the timing of hearings and sentencing is determined by the substance of the case and the progress of the proceedings; it is not something to be advanced or delayed based on political or social impact."
To the question of whether enacting or revising laws with the purpose of directly influencing the outcome of a particular person's ongoing trial could exceed the limits of legislative power, he answered, "Legislative power is a constitutional authority granted to the National Assembly and should be broadly respected, but if legislation is carried out with the purpose of directly influencing the outcome of a particular person's ongoing trial, I believe this requires constitutional review in relation to the constitutional principle of separation of powers and to judicial power and the independence of the courts and trials."