Home > Opinion > Columns

What abandonment of Kang Sun-woo and defense of Lee Hye-hoon reveals

Published: 06 Jan. 2026, 00:03

IM JANG-HYUK

The author is a lawyer and the head of the political news department at the JoongAng Ilbo.

“I will be a sturdy fence around Kang Sun-woo.”

That was the promise made by Jung Chung-rae, leader of the Democratic Party (DP), on Aug. 2 last year. It is a promise he did not keep. Jung initially categorized allegations that Rep. Kang Sun-woo had ordered aides to fix her toilet, arrange leisure pickups and handle proxy driving as matters that should be managed internally. But when accusations surfaced that she had received money in connection with party nominations, the party expelled her within three days.

Rep. Kang Sun-woo, then a Democratic Party lawmaker and nominee for minister of gender equality and family, listens to questions with a stern expression during her confirmation hearing at the National Assembly in Yeouido, Seoul, on July 14, 2025. The Democratic Party expelled Kang from the party on Jan. 1, 2026, over allegations that she received money in connection with nominations for city council seats. [NEWS1]

During that same period, no announcement was made that Lee Hye-hoon, the nominee for head of the Ministry of Planning and Budget, would step aside, despite the release of audio recordings in which she could be heard shouting and hurling verbal abuse at an intern. On Jan. 5, Kang Hoon-sik said the president’s position was to “try once” to proceed with her appointment.

As of Jan. 5, the governing camp’s choice could be summarized as abandoning Kang Sun-woo while standing by Lee Hye-hoon. The decision is not entirely difficult to understand. Workplace abuse that is unlikely to result in criminal punishment and illegal nomination donations that could lead to arrest and prison time are, from the party leadership’s perspective, issues of a different order. The DP is well aware that nomination-related money scandals, especially ahead of local elections, can shatter trust in the party’s entire nomination system.

The decision to elevate Lee also reflects confidence on the part of President Lee Jae Myung, whose approval ratings have remained high. It signals an intent to “use a wider field.” For the post overseeing the national budget framework, someone who can speak independently may be preferable to a career bureaucrat inclined to say yes or a partisan figure vulnerable to pressure from within the camp. Presidential spokesperson Kim Nam-joon suggested that Lee could serve as a “red team,” offering internal criticism.

Yet the combination of cutting loose Kang and shielding Lee sends a message that goes beyond tactical calculation. It effectively declares a view that abuse of subordinates is wrong but not enough to warrant cutting ties with one’s own, or that apology and remorse are sufficient. That perspective is now being broadcast publicly.

It is possible that neither Kang nor Lee ranks among the worst offenders in the National Assembly’s long history of abusing aides. Many reporters can attest, privately, to stories far more severe than those that make the news. Such accounts often go unpublished out of concern that exposure would cost victims their jobs. One lawmaker, aides recall, once stood behind a staff member who was writing and sneered, “Do you carry your head just to wear a hat?” Another screamed at an aide because the aide’s elementary school-aged daughter had used the lawmaker-only restroom in an empty office building over the weekend. Still another routinely forced secretaries to drive their own cars for weekend schedules, effectively demanding seven-day workweeks.

Some of these figures went on to hold senior government posts and win multiple terms in safe districts. Even Kang’s record of dismissing 46 aides over five years may not be a record. Reporters who cover the National Assembly know there are strong competitors. Silence has made it easier for lawmakers to tell themselves that abuse is something that “happens on the job” or that “everyone does it.”

But the ground is shifting. Law and society are increasingly recognizing that no one should be allowed to damage another person’s dignity and sense of self through words or actions. This understanding places personal dignity at the core of rights derived directly from Article 10 of the Constitution, which affirms human dignity and the pursuit of happiness. Conduct overlapping with what Koreans call gapjil, or abuse of power, has already been codified as workplace harassment. In 2019, the Labor Standards Act was amended to prohibit workplace harassment and impose fines for violations. Legislation is also being pursued to explicitly provide for the immediate cessation and prevention of acts that infringe personal rights, along with claims for damages under civil law. Even lawmakers accustomed to abusing subordinates will find it increasingly difficult to resist the broader demand for stronger protection of personal dignity. That shift is the cumulative result of victims who found the courage to speak, often in isolation.

Lee Hye-hoon, nominee for head of the Ministry of Planning and Budget, bows as she arrives at her confirmation hearing preparation office at the Korea Deposit Insurance Corporation in Jung-gu, Seoul, on Jan. 5. [KIM KYUNG-ROK]

Abuse of power violates the basic rights of those in subordinate positions. When extended to subcontracting relationships, such abuse can become severe and prolonged enough to threaten victims’ health and even their lives. It typically occurs in highly private settings, such as face-to-face encounters or phone calls between lawmakers and aides, where power imbalances are stark.

Placing someone steeped in such behavior at the helm of a ministry is risky. It turns hundreds or thousands of civil servants into potential victims and can pass the harm on to other vulnerable actors in the public and private sectors. In wartime, the ability to instill fear might be considered a leadership trait. Outside of that, it is hard to see when such conduct could ever be acceptable.

It may be late, but now would be the time for parties to reach some agreement on what level of abuse should disqualify someone from public office. Applying the same standard to the nomination of elected candidates would be better still. An election is close at hand.

This article was originally written in Korean and translated by a bilingual reporter with the help of generative AI tools. It was then edited by a native English-speaking editor. All AI-assisted translations are reviewed and refined by our newsroom.