Factional tensions are flaring again inside the Democratic Party of Korea over allegations that followers of the Shincheonji Church of Jesus the Temple of the Tabernacle of the Testimony joined the party en masse. After party leader Kim Min-seok directly cited signs of group enrollment by Shincheonji members based on the party's internal investigation, lawmakers aligned with former leader Chung Chung-rae pushed back forcefully, demanding full disclosure of the findings and accountability.
As the dispute widened, the party leadership held an emergency closed-door meeting on the 14th to contain the fallout but reached no clear conclusion, settling only on a gag order within the party.
The controversy erupted after Kim appeared on the party's official YouTube channel "Minty 07" that morning and disclosed the status of the investigation into the alleged mass enrollment. Regarding the findings of the party membership review task force, Kim said, "It has been confirmed that there was a considerable degree of group enrollment, and beyond that, we have also accumulated quite meaningful testimony."
He added, "Strict verification and confirmation can only be done through a criminal investigation," and said, "The matter is complex and there are political considerations to weigh, so we have deferred full-scale discussion." The allegation of Shincheonji involvement was first raised by Kim during the party's national convention, and since taking office he has conducted an internal investigation through a task force headed by Supreme Council member Park Sun-won.
After Kim's remarks, lawmakers aligned with Chung immediately objected and urged him to disclose specific evidence. Chung said on social media, "If there is a secret alliance, it must be broken, and if there isn't, the allegation must be shattered," adding, "Disclose what there is and let those responsible take responsibility — whoever tries to paper this over is the culprit."
Supreme Council member Han Min-soo also took aim at the leadership during a Supreme Council meeting, saying, "We were clearly briefed that organized voting could not be confirmed, yet the allegation is being dredged up again." He said, "If the party cannot properly reveal the inside story of this internal strife, it should start with an apology, and if the claims are false, someone must take responsibility."
Supreme Council member Choi Min-hee said, "The existence of a three-way secret alliance of anti-Lee Jae-myung forces, Shincheonji and factionalists must be exposed, and the results of the fact-finding must be made public." Supreme Council member Lee Sung-yoon raised the question of how the findings had been reported in the media, saying, "Kim said that if a confidential matter were made public, he would expel the person from meetings regardless of rank. As promised, he should see this through to the end and carry out the expulsion."
As the fallout grew within the party, the leadership convened a closed-door meeting at the National Assembly members' office building that afternoon to discuss its response, attended by Kim, floor leader Han Byung-do and the Supreme Council. The meeting produced no clear remedy or direction for follow-up steps.
Kim Tae-seon, chief of staff to the party leader, told reporters after the meeting, "We concluded that we would give further thought to how to handle the Shincheonji matter before deciding," adding, "We agreed to stay silent on everything else." Kim also declined to elaborate when reporters asked whether any action would be taken, saying only, "I have nothing to say."
The Democratic Party plans to receive the task force's final findings, including specific figures, after the parliamentary audit of government agencies concludes, and then review whether to present them at a general meeting of its lawmakers and whether to refer the matter to prosecutors. Still, the dispute appears unlikely to subside easily, given the wide gap between factions over the scale and timing of the Shincheonji members' enrollment as well as whether organized voting actually took place. In particular, if the wrangling continues over how much of the findings to disclose and who bears responsibility, the possibility of the internal conflict spreading further cannot be ruled out.