Cho Kuk defends film “Assassin(s)”, calls far-right attacks a cultural war
In short
Cho Kuk, head of the Rebuilding Korea Party’s Innovation Policy Research Institute, said after watching the film “Assassin(s)” that it bears no legal responsibility for defamation and does not mock the death of Yuk Young-soo. He criticized People Power Party politicians and far-right groups for attacks on actor Yoo Hae-jin, including a lawmaker calling his face “North Korean-looking” and plans for protests at his home. Cho called for the release of state-held materials about Yuk’s 1974 assassination, including the bullet, to settle the controversy.
Read the full story 2 min read
Cho Kuk, head of the Rebuilding Korea Party’s Innovation Policy Research Institute, said on Oct 4 after watching the film “Assassin(s)” that it bears no legal responsibility for defamation and does not mock the death of Yuk Young-soo. In a Facebook post, he also criticized what he described as a far-right cultural war against the film and actor Yoo Hae-jin, according to the three business outlets. [ 1 , 2 , 3 ]
Cho said the 1974 shooting death of Yuk Young-soo was a tragedy and offered his condolences, noting he was in the fifth grade at the time. He said the film, directed by Hur Jin-ho, does not endorse Moon Se-kwang’s act. He praised the combination of fact and fiction, saying the 131-minute film passed quickly and that he understood why it was called a “Korean JFK.” He also said he liked its depiction of the KCIA’s press censorship and reporters’ fight against it. [ 2 , 3 ]
Cho criticized People Power Party politicians and far-right groups for what he called color-theory attacks and claims of Chinese capital influx. He singled out Rep. Joo Jin-woo for calling Yoo Hae-jin’s face “North Korean-looking.” He said far-right groups had announced a protest in front of Yoo’s home and that online attacks including swearing and rating terrorism were continuing. He said the far-right’s cultural war poses a serious threat to the freedom of culture and arts. [ 1 , 2 , 3 ]
To settle the controversy, Cho proposed that state agencies release all materials related to Yuk’s assassination, including the bullet that he said was collected and stored by the KCIA, now the National Intelligence Service. He said the suspicions raised by the film had been previously raised by MBC, SBS and other media, and criticized those who were silent then but now attack the film. [ 2 , 3 ]
In his post, Cho also claimed that the film’s prosecutor character “Kim Hak-su” is based on Kim Ki-choon, a former presidential chief of staff. He described Kim’s career as a legal aide to then-KCIA chief Shin Jik-su, later KCIA anti-communist investigation bureau chief, prosecutor general and justice minister under Roh Tae-woo, and presidential chief of staff under Park Geun-hye. Cho called Kim a role model of “political prosecutors,” mentioning the Chowon boar soup restaurant incident and Park Geun-hye’s state affairs manipulation scandal. He praised Yoo Hae-jin as a “national actor” with a “righteous army face” and said he would watch the film again with Pyeongtaek citizens. [ 3 ]
Why it matters
The dispute highlights the political sensitivity of films dealing with South Korea’s authoritarian past and the ongoing conflict between camps over cultural expression, as described by the outlets. Cho Kuk’s call to release state-held materials on the 1974 assassination could renew public debate over the case, though the documents do not report any government response.
Key facts
- Cho Kuk watched the film “Assassin(s)” directed by Hur Jin-ho and posted his views on Facebook on Oct 4. [ 2 , 3 ]
- Cho said the film bears no legal responsibility for defamation and does not endorse Moon Se-kwang’s act or mock Yuk Young-soo’s death. [ 2 , 3 ]
- Cho criticized People Power Party Rep. Joo Jin-woo for calling actor Yoo Hae-jin’s face “North Korean-looking” and said far-right groups planned protests at Yoo’s home. [ 2 , 3 ]
- Cho called for the release of state-held materials related to Yuk Young-soo’s assassination, including the bullet he said was collected by the KCIA. [ 2 , 3 ]
- Cho praised actor Yoo Hae-jin as a “national actor” with a “righteous army face” (의병상). [ 2 , 3 ]
- Cho said he would watch the film again with Pyeongtaek citizens. [ 2 , 3 ]
- Cho claimed the film’s suspicions were previously raised by MBC, SBS and other media. [ 3 ]
Confirmed by several sources
- Cho Kuk said the film “Assassin(s)” bears no legal responsibility for defamation and does not mock Yuk Young-soo’s death. [ 1 , 2 , 3 ]
- Cho criticized far-right attacks on the film and actor Yoo Hae-jin, describing them as a cultural war. [ 1 , 2 , 3 ]
- Cho called for the release of state-held materials related to Yuk Young-soo’s assassination. [ 2 , 3 ]
- Cho praised Yoo Hae-jin as a “national actor” with a “righteous army face”. [ 2 , 3 ]
Still unclear
- Whether state agencies will release the materials Cho Kuk requested. The documents do not report any response from the government, the KCIA’s successor the National Intelligence Service, or other agencies.
- The claim that the film’s prosecutor character “Kim Hak-su” is based on Kim Ki-choon. Only Maeil Business reports this claim, attributed to Cho Kuk; no other document mentions it or confirms it.
- The specific online attacks on Yoo Hae-jin, such as “rating terrorism” and organized swearing. These are described only in Maeil Business as claims by Cho Kuk, without independent verification in the documents.
- The time Cho Kuk posted on Facebook. The documents do not state when on Oct 4 he posted; only the outlets’ publication times are given.