Representative Park Eun-jung criticizes the briefing of the special prosecutor for the insurrection in front of the prosecution mark.

Park Eun-jung's Questioning

On June 27, 2025, Park Eun-jung, a member of the Justice Party, appeared on "Kim Eo-jun's Humble Is Difficult News Factory" and raised meaningful concerns about the briefing method of the special investigation team led by Cho Eun-seok regarding insurrection. Park pointed out that the investigation team's announcement of the details of the investigation into former President Yoon Seok-youl took place in an official briefing space marked with the prosecutor's office logo, criticizing that this scene led the public to perceive the special investigation team as a subordinate organization of the prosecutor's office. His observation contains profound insights that go beyond a simple issue of space choice, as it is a symbolic choice directly related to the identity of the special investigation system and the independence of the investigation. This article aims to analyze the political symbolism of the briefing presentation by the Cho Eun-seok special investigation team and its institutional background from various perspectives, using Park Eun-jung's public concerns as a starting point.

Independence of the Special Prosecutor

The special prosecutor is an entirely different organization from the prosecution. The special prosecutor is a temporary and independent body established by the National Assembly through special legislation to clarify the truth of a specific case, and does not operate under the direction of the prosecution. The special prosecutor for the insurrection, Cho Eun-seok, was also formed under the 'Special Prosecutor Appointment Act for the Investigation of Former President Yoon Seok-youl's Insurrection and Insurrection Incitement Case,' exercising the investigative and prosecutorial powers independently. It is not affiliated with the Ministry of Justice and does not follow the direction of the Prosecutor General. In contrast, the prosecution is a permanent national institution established under the 'Prosecutor's Office Act' and is part of the Ministry of Justice. In recent years, the powers of the prosecution have been curtailed due to discussions on the adjustment of investigative rights between the police and prosecution, the establishment of the Corruption Investigation Office for High-ranking Officials, and discussions on the establishment of a Serious Crimes Investigation Agency, placing the prosecution in a dual task of defending political neutrality and organizational legitimacy. Thus, there are clear differences between the two in terms of legal basis, organizational nature, and command structure. Nevertheless, if the special prosecutor appears to act as part of the prosecution, it is a significant issue that leads to institutional misunderstandings.

Symbolism of the briefing

The briefing by the special prosecutor team led by Jo Eun-seok took place in the special prosecutor's office located within the Seoul High Prosecutors' Office. This space utilizes part of the prosecutor's office, and the backdrop of the briefing prominently features the prosecutor's office emblem and the English inscription 'PROSECUTION SERVICE.' Special Prosecutor Park Ji-young announced the request for an arrest warrant against former President Yoon and the rejection of an informal summons request at this venue. The issue is that this visual scene can mislead the public's perception of the investigative entity. The prosecutor's office emblem functions as a symbol of law enforcement authority, going beyond being just a logo. Therefore, the investigation presented under it may appear to be led by the prosecution rather than the special prosecutor. In fact, in media video reports and images, there are frequent instances where the prosecutor's emblem leaves a stronger impression than the name of the presenter. As a result, having the special prosecutor stand under the prosecutor's office emblem, regardless of intent, induces the effect of misleading the prosecution investigation as the special prosecutor's investigation, which can seriously undermine the independence and neutrality of the special prosecutor system.

Compromise of Political Neutrality

Park Eun-jung is the first politician to sharply capture this point. He pointed out that the special prosecutor's announcement of the investigation details while masked in the prosecutor's external facade is not merely a matter of location but a symbolic performance that undermines the political neutrality and objectivity of the investigation. This criticism goes beyond simply expressing visual discomfort and prompts reflection on how the symbols of power interfere with the fairness of the investigation. The legitimacy of the investigation is determined not only by its content but also by its form, space, and the way messages are constructed, and all these elements become part of public perception. Therefore, the format of the briefing is by no means secondary.

Background of Special Counsel Cho Eun-seok

Special Prosecutor Cho Eun-seok is a figure who has served in key positions within the prosecution for a long time. Having held roles such as the head of the Criminal Division of the Supreme Prosecutors' Office and the director of the Judicial Research and Training Institute, he understands the organizational culture and order of the prosecution better than anyone. When such a figure is tasked with a special prosecution investigation, it is difficult to rule out the possibility that he may uncritically adopt prosecutorial practices and forms. In particular, as the reduction of prosecutorial power and organizational restructuring have continued, a certain sense of crisis and resistance has been sensed within the prosecution. In this context, the briefing on the internal rebellion investigation against the backdrop of the prosecution's emblem can also be interpreted as an act of symbolically restoring prosecutorial authority before the public through the guise of a special prosecution.

The Importance of Form and Content

Political rhetoric, especially in investigations targeting former presidents, places equal importance on 'form' and 'content'. The public judges the legitimacy not only based on the truth of the investigation but also on how it is presented. The symbols and spaces used by investigative bodies carry messages within themselves. The prosecutor's mark is not merely a visual element, but a representation of legal authority and a historical signifier. When the special prosecutor announces an investigation under this mark, despite the investigative subject being the special prosecutor, the authority of the investigation is reconstructed through the prosecution. This ultimately conflicts with the original intent of introducing the special prosecutor system—separation from and ensuring neutrality with the prosecution—and can undermine the basis of public trust.

The Reason for the Existence of the Special Investigation

The core of the special prosecutor system is independence from the prosecution and political neutrality. Therefore, if 'separation from the prosecution' is not clearly defined in both form and content, the institutional legitimacy of the special prosecutor will inevitably be shaken. To this end, the following principles are necessary: - Symbolic separation of briefing space: The special prosecutor must avoid locations where symbols of specific institutions, such as the prosecutor's office logo or the Ministry of Justice logo, are exposed. - Development of independent symbols: The special prosecutor should have an independent logo, signboard, background, etc., and visually express their independence. - Raising public awareness: The special prosecutor must continuously convey the message “We are not the prosecution” to the public throughout the investigation process. Once these criteria are met, the special prosecutor can realize its reason for existence and defend the credibility of investigations from political controversies.

"Conclusion

The briefing style of the investigation team led by Special Prosecutor Jo Eun-seok is not merely a matter of space. It can be seen as a visual political act that seeks to reconstruct authority and legitimacy through symbolism. The concerns raised by Member of Parliament Park Eun-jung warn that such visual structures can undermine the essence of the institution and present a minimum standard for safeguarding the independence and neutrality, which are the lifeblood of the special prosecution system. The special prosecution is not the prosecution. In order for the special prosecution to maintain its distinctiveness, it must clearly distance itself from the prosecution in both content and form. This sense of distance is the condition for trust, and it is the only way to ensure the viability of the special prosecution system.