Han Dong-hoon: “They intend to commit adultery openly” ... slams agency chief over Cabinet meeting attendance

[Financial News]  Independent lawmaker Han Dong-hoon criticized the government and the Democratic Party of Korea over the head of the Serious Crime Investigation Agency attending a Cabinet meeting, saying, “They intend to commit adultery openly from now on.”
Han made the remark on Facebook on the 26th, citing comments made that day by Minister of the Interior and Safety Yun Ho-jung and Serious Crime Investigation Agency chief Kim Ji-hoon during a comprehensive audit by the National Assembly’s Security and Public Administration Committee.
During the audit, Minister Yun responded to criticism that the agency chief’s attendance at Cabinet meetings could undermine investigative independence by asking, “Did the prosecution maintain political neutrality during the 25 years when the prosecutor general did not attend Cabinet meetings?” 
Chief Kim said, “I think that, in cases in major categories, it is right to align with and follow the direction of government administration.”
In response, Han said, “There were cases in the past where the prosecutor general secretly submitted to power even when he never attended Cabinet meetings. This was an exchange between the Democratic Party administration and the agency chief about attending Cabinet meetings and openly submitting to power from now on.” He criticized them, saying, “Since many people have affairs in secret, they’re saying they’ll have affairs openly from now on.” He added, “The Democratic Party administration and its minions are turning the country into an underdeveloped nation.”
Meanwhile, President Lee Jae Myung said at a Cabinet meeting he chaired at Cheong Wa Dae on the 27th, “Under the Constitution and the law, all central administrative agencies, including ministries and agencies, are subject to the President’s direct command and supervision.” He called it “part of normalizing what is abnormal.”
President Lee said, “What does attending an open meeting like this have to do with political neutrality?” He added, “Would a Cabinet member make a personal request or issue an improper directive at a meeting like this? It is actually less likely that anyone would engage in conduct that violates the law.”
He went on to emphasize, “When heads of investigative agencies did not attend Cabinet meetings in the past, was the neutrality of those agencies maintained well? It was not.” He added, “There is no connection whatsoever between attending open meetings as a legal obligation and political neutrality.”
[email protected] Kim Su-yeon Reporter