The suspicions that the Chosun Ilbo and Rep. Kwak Sang-do are alleging are not true at all, and we believe that it is not worth responding to.
On the 13th, during the Lunar New Year holiday, the Seoul Foundation for Arts and Culture distributed explanatory materials related to the’Emergency Art Support for Corona 19 Victims’ project. What emotion (?) lingers in the expression “thing that is not worth dealing with”. The data on this day were secondary data following the explanatory data distributed by the foundation on the 9th. Why did the Seoul Foundation for Arts and Culture have to clarify two times before and after the Lunar New Year holiday?
First 9 days <조선일보>Is <문준용, 원서에 딱 4줄 쓰고 코로나 지원금 1400만원 받았다> In a separate article, “It was confirmed on the 9th that the son of President Moon Jae-in, 38, applied for’Emergency Art Support for Corona Damage’ to Seoul, and was selected as the best recipient of support even though he wrote only four lines in the confirmation of the damage.” did. It was an extension of the suspicion raised by Kwak and others last month.
The source of the article was data provided by the Office of the People’s Power Kwak Sang-do. “The National Power of Congress, Kwak Sang-do, conducted a survey of 281 applicants in the visual field submitted by the Seoul Foundation for Arts and Culture, and the result was a total of 281 applicants. The competition rate was 6-1 with 46 final candidates. The remaining 235 Among them, 91.4% (215 people) fell even though they described the damage in more detail than Mr. Moon.”
The primary material of the Seoul Foundation for Arts and Culture was a quick response to this. The foundation said, “The’Certificate of Damage’ is only a reference material for judging whether or not it is subject to examination,” and the criteria for deliberation of the support project are “① Appropriateness and validity of the project (20 points). ③ Considering the performance and contribution of the project (20 points), the applicants were determined.”
The point is that the’damage fact’ itself is not included in the review criteria at all. Therefore, it was said that the contents of the confirmation letter, as well as the amount and form of description, are only reference materials that identify whether there is actual damage or whether there is actual application qualification. According to the Foundation’s explanation, <조선일보>A. For reference materials that are irrelevant to the screening criteria or qualifications, the sensational headline of’just 4 lines’ and comparisons with other applicants made a useless flaw.
Rep. Kwak persisted despite the Foundation’s explanation and Moon Jun-yong’s refutation. On the 13th, I started catching another pod. Rep. Kwak said in a long Facebook post saying, “Maybe it’s because it’s a’Moon Jae-in-owned country’,” in a long Facebook post, the Seoul Foundation for Cultural Affairs initially announced “about 150” applicants for the project. I made a problem with supporting It was argued that later increasing the number of support groups (persons) was a trick to support Mr. Moon, who did not meet the selection criteria.
Then, on that day, the Seoul Foundation for Arts and Culture distributed <서울시, 코로나19 피해 예술인 긴급지원 신청 몰려…15억 추가 투입>Iranian explanatory material was shared. In this data, the Foundation stated that the number of applicants was added and the number of applicants was increased due to the crowd of applicants, like other emergency disaster subsidies.
Following the foundation, Moon also countered again in another Facebook post on the 14th.
In summary, Kwak’s claim is’I increased the number of people selected in case A would be eliminated’. But there is only one basis. ‘Because A is the son of the president.’ Is this a valid basis? Is this possible in the world these days? Do you think it is necessary to specifically clarify what is suspicious about the process of expanding the number of people selected?
However, Kwak seems to admit that there is no basis. Looking at the way he raises suspicions, he’s never been actively trying to spread his claims. At best, I am writing through Facebook. If you were confident in your assertion, you would have done something like an official press conference or distribution of press releases. Right now, Kwak’s argument is only being conveyed through some media.
Rep. Kwak Sang-do’s past
The controversy over the subsidies for the sons of the president seems to stem from the disparaging perception that an artist is merely an object of a kind of fat surplus woman act or a relief project for the weak, which does not have a social production value enough to receive a salary.
That is why the president’s son and full-time writer can dare to criticize him for being selected by just applying for a conspiracy for a living like many salaried workers. .
-In the Facebook post of Director Jung Yoon-cheol on December 20 last year
The controversy can be seen as being close to the suspicion raised by those who were ignorant of the facts of the culture and arts sector or the support projects, or did not intend to look into them at all. Otherwise, it would be a tragedy created by the desire to somehow turn President Moon’s son into a few examples in the past that also ruled as the prince of the regime. It would not be unreasonable to hear a voice saying,’If the president’s son decided to eat it, he would open his hand to a conglomerate and receive 14 million won support.’
Having made a hundred concessions, should I give up the emergency aid money because I am the son of the President? If Moon actually suffered damage in exhibitions, etc. and received support through the same standards as other creators to compensate for this, there would be no problem. If you are the son of the president and have not received preferential treatment, would it not be a kind of violence and discrimination to force damage to the son of the president?
|
View larger picture |
|
| ▲ Kwak Sang-do, a member of the People’s Power, attended a discussion meeting hosted by the “Asia Forum 21”, a group of journalists in Daegu Gyeongbuk. 2020.11.6 | |
| Ⓒ Jo Jung Hoon |
View related photos |
Of course, Kwak cannot agree with this. No, it went further here. On the 15th, Kwak announced a civil lawsuit against President Moon through an interview. According to the article, “The main point of Kwak’s lawsuit was that, even though the police had never blocked the investigation of’Kim Hak’s video’ by the police during the time of the Park Geun-hye administration when he served as chief civilian at the Blue House. do.
In March 2019, President Moon ordered a thorough investigation into the’Kim Hak’s case’, which emerged as a concern of the public during the prosecution reform phase. It was with the Burning Sun incident and Jang Ja-yeon incident. Why is this an investigation order aimed at the individual Kwak Sang-do?
Earlier in December of last year, Rep. Kwak claimed, “I will accuse President Moon Jae-in and Justice Minister Chu Mi-ae, who tried to print Prosecutor General Yoon Seok-yeol, on charges of abuse of authority.” It is also questionable whether the opposition lawmaker, who was a former prosecutor, will be accused of direct prosecution rather than’political power’.
A lawyer from a prosecutor said that not a few prosecutors viewed the world as one of two. Who has committed and who has committed a crime. In addition, some prosecutors who face criminals on a daily basis said they have simplified the standard of seeing things in the world into crime and non-crime.
Which side did Congressman Kwak fall into during the past public security prosecutors? Come to think of it, the 13th was the seventh year after Kang Ki-hoon was convicted in the retrial of the suicide manipulation case in 2014.