The Liberty Korea Party fiercely condemned the court after it dismissed the request for an arrest warrant for the younger brother of Justice Minister Cho Kuk. For the second day, they attacked the judge overseeing warrants, blaming his past as a former prosecutor and the fact that the chief judge who appointed him was a member of the Society for the Research of Our Law for the latest decision. Floor leader Na Kyung-won said, "It was a dismissal tailored to Cheong Wa Dae, a dismissal to protect Cho Kuk." She further said, "When we look at the relationship of the judge overseeing the warrants, the chief justice of the Supreme Court, and the chief judge of the Seoul Central District Court, we can find a controversial bias in ideology." As a former judge, she went too far when she mentioned groundless ideological standards. The lawmakers of the Liberty Korea Party even announced that they would visit the chief justice of the Supreme Court and the chief judge of the Seoul Central District Court in protest.

The ruling party exerting influence on the Prosecution Service was also an ugly sight. The Democratic Party of Korea publicly criticized prosecutors saying, "The court pulled the brakes on the rash investigation of the prosecutors," and "The prosecutors requested an arrest warrant, an act intended for show." This can be interpreted as an attempt to openly pressure the Prosecution Service, which reportedly is considering an arrest warrant for Minister Cho's wife and another arrest warrant for Cho's brother. It is difficult for the ruling party to avoid the criticism that it is making "threats" to influence the investigation.

The latest responses by the politicians were quite different from when the court detained Kim Kyung-soo, governor of Gyeongsangnam-do in January. At that time, the Democratic Party of Korea attacked the judge in the first trial accusing the ruling as "an organized attack by the people responsible for the long-established irregularities encouraging the abuse of judicial authority," and called for an impeachment. The Liberty Korea Party condemned the Democratic Party saying, "Rejecting a ruling is undermining democracy." The tides have turned this time. Supporting a court ruling if it sides in their favor and attacking it if it doesn't is a typical example of double standards--naeronambul (true love if I'm involved, but just an affair if it's someone else's business). Such attitudes were repeated in previous court rulings concerning the bail of former President Lee Myung-bak, the arrest warrant for former Minister of Environment Kim Eun-kyung, and the suspended sentence for Lee Jae-yong, vice chairman of Samsung Electronics. If supporting or condemning the judiciary depending on the advantages or disadvantages their ruling brings to politicians isn't abusing the judiciary by threatening the independence of the court from its roots, then what is? Each time such incidents occurred, voices condemning the judgment were criticized for undermining the rule of law, but such criticism fell on deaf ears.

Anyone can have opinions that differ from the court ruling. But a political party indiscriminately attacking the court and the Prosecution Service because of a ruling they do not like is dangerous behavior that threatens the rule of law. How can they ask ordinary citizens to abide by the law and principles? The Constitution guarantees the independence of the judges in order to keep in check the abuse of legislative and administrative power. This is the separation of powers. The court and the Prosecution Service are not institutions that should hear and investigate cases according to the wishes of the public or of those in power. Their judgment should be based only on facts, evidence and the law. If they want to uphold democracy, there is a certain line that must be respected. If they cross that line, the foundation of democracy can crumble.