Please ask the three who attended today's meeting. Who was absent from the meeting on the 31st? There are two people here, including me, from the Planning and Coordination Office. So, I would like to ask you two. On that day, when I participated in things like candidate nominations, around 80 applicants were narrowed down to 30 or 50 applicants each, which is actually a process where the style of conducting the meeting varies depending on the person. Yes, so some people go through each one by one, saying this person is absolutely not suitable, while others approach it by saying this person must be chosen. Do you remember how the selection process was carried out, Mr. Kim Young-gwan? Was it a consensus method, or did you first present these candidates, and then it was decided through a vote? The process was conducted through a voting system where two people would receive two votes or one vote.

I received one vote or one abstention, so that's how it went. How does the voting process work? Could you please explain it a bit? For example, in the case of a visit, originally nine people, now we need to appoint nine people, right? For example, if two out of nine people vote, and if they receive votes, they are appointed. So, the chairman recommends one set of nine people, and the vice-chairman recommends one set of nine people. Is this how it was done? So, all the subjects vote on paper, right? Then, each of the two selected nine people, right? So, there were cases of agreement or disagreement among the nine people, right? There are cases of agreement and disagreement, so the ones that match receive the votes, right? No, overall, I wonder if this is how people are selected in companies.

I did it this way, alternating nine people each, and I took charge of the nomination and Miss Korea judging panel for the first time. When I saw it, it seemed like after going through the normal compression stage, during the compression, all the reasons for exclusion were clearly stated. In this way, if there are more judges, there could be a popular vote or some other method. With nine people sitting, I selected the nine people I had in mind. Then, when the intersection of those nine people was formed, they would definitely be appointed. So, if the president was absent, what would happen next? In case of discrepancies arising [MUSIC] repeatedly, we conducted multiple rounds of voting. Yes, we continued to vote multiple times for nine people. We continued to vote multiple times for nine people, but eventually, since we couldn't finalize the selection of these nine people, we had to stop and appoint six people. That's how it was done. How many rounds did this process go on for?

Did it end? Then, I remember it continued for about six or seven or eight times. Six people went through seven or eight rounds. Yes, yes, we kept voting. So, in the end, the selected individuals were those who reflected the opinions of many, or was it decided to split evenly? What happened? I don't know that well. If so, then it will definitely be recorded in the minutes. Later, when we look at the minutes, we will see that we proposed nine people, and then the process of reconciling differences remained there. There didn't seem to be many differences to reconcile. Well, if there was a mismatch as mentioned earlier, can there be no differences of opinion? In that case, it means that two people kept voting until the same people came out, without expressing their opinions. So, the difference arose.

I think this person seems to be better without making any accusations and just continuing with the voting, right? Yes, they voted on that. So, does this adjustment happen based on that? We should discuss our opinions with each other. In fact, in a situation where opinions are divided, what is the organization of the committee? Ultimately, it's not a unilateral decision-making body, and the reason it operates like this is that there should be an exchange process for different personnel decisions or various issues through a process of reaching mutual agreement. However, according to what the witnesses have said, it is clear that there were disagreements from the beginning, but there is no record of how these disagreements were divided and they just continued voting in a situation where disagreements existed. Is my interpretation correct? You are testifying like that now, right? Yes, we made decisions through voting. Can we see the results of repeated voting then?

Later, it's not about what this is, where two people voted, opened, and shared, but just sharing with each other. I think you would have done it like I am these people, you are those people. Ah, we didn't do that. We didn't do that. What did you do then? Voting is voting, writing on the next ballot, that's what it is. But didn't we do something like that before? I'm not sure. Yes, that's right. That's right. It's about voting anonymously, right? It's the turn to stamp on the ballot now. Like this. Yes, let's start again from minute 2. From minute 2, yes. No, I will stop here. I can't understand, so I can't continue with additional questions. If the chairman or the secretary knows a little more, please help. This is my... this vote... yes, please give it here. Two minutes now, applying it to 2021.

2명이 투표로 뽑았다구요? 네? 당황해서 질문못하는 이준석 의원

콘텐츠 왕국 MBC경남 공식계정 

홈페이지 : http://www.mbcgn.kr
페이스북 : http://www.facebook.com/withmbcgn
인스타그램  : https://www.instagram.com/mbcgn/

2명이 투표로 뽑았다구요? 네? 당황해서 질문못하는 이준석 의원

2명이 투표로 뽑았다구요? 네? 당황해서 질문못하는 이준석 의원

스크립트