Source: Ddanzi

What happened

On Sept. 26, Ddanzi published episode 105 of columnist Mangong’s lecture series on journalists’ “one-sided love” for prosecutors, invoking Jang Young-ja — the 1980s fraud figure who said “the economy is circulation.” Mangong argues negative reporting on prosecutors is so rare in Korea that mainstream outlets alone would suggest the prosecution has no serious problems, and that critics are framed as the real troublemakers.

The piece is opinion, not a court filing. It cites recent coverage portraying rank-and-file prosecutors as overworked servants still fighting for citizens even as investigation powers are stripped, while framing the ruling Democratic Party as persecuting prosecutors and crime victims. Mangong mocks comparisons of prosecutors with highlighters to Jedi knights, and says legacy journalists appear to expect public outrage against the party.

The breakdown

Mangong highlights a contradiction he says the press echoes: prosecutors are described as a small cohort handling a minor workload, yet prosecution investigation authority is treated as indispensable. He revisits cases he says show leniency — Kim Hak-ui cleared with his travel ban criticized; Kim Keon-hee receiving a house-call probe and a no-indictment outcome on stock-manipulation questions while prosecutors later demanded escort protection; and the Yu Woo-seong espionage case, where Mangong alleges a prosecutor fabricated immigration records yet later held senior posts under Yoon Suk Yeol before stepping aside amid the Marine Chae Sang-byung death controversy.

Police officers who err face punishment and dismissal, he writes; prosecutors who err are rarely disciplined and sometimes promoted. During the Dec. 2024 insurrection, he could find almost no mainstream articles asking whether prosecutors participated, despite Yoon having risen from the prosecution’s top ranks. Mangong’s structural claim: prosecutors monopolize investigation and indictment, so they can shield colleagues; legacy media once functioned as Korea’s main public square, so prosecutors invested in journalist alliances — inflating good news and minimizing scandals — to steer opinion. He links that alleged alliance to Yoon’s presidency and promises a follow-up episode.

Why it matters outside Korea

Korea is mid-reform on separating police investigation from prosecution, reshaping who handles fraud, visa, and workplace-crime complaints. Mangong does not prove a cartel, but names a domestic suspicion English wire summaries may inherit: if Korean legacy outlets frame prosecutors as embattled heroes, overseas readers can misread institutional conflict as partisan noise. After an insurrection led by a former prosecutor general, media-prosecutor alignment is a live political theory inside Korea — not settled fact, but a debate with constitutional stakes.

What travelers and expats should watch

• Cross-check crime and visa stories against outlet type. When prosecutor discretion — travel bans, phone seizures, indictment timing — decides a foreigner’s case, note whether coverage treats the prosecution as neutral arbiter or as an institution under siege; Mangong says the latter frame dominates legacy desks.
• Track investigation–prosecution separation implementation, not only “persecuted prosecutor” headlines. Reforms change which agency takes your initial complaint; during the transition, note which body owns the file and whether handoffs are documented.

Context

Read this as a progressive columnist’s theory of why Korean legacy media rarely attacks prosecutors, not as verified proof of a criminal cartel. Mangong builds on selected scandals and tone samples from JoongAng Ilbo, News1, Yonhap, SBS, Hankyoreh, and Pressian — filtered through his argument that opinion flow, like Jang Young-ja’s “circulation,” can be captured at choke points. Useful for understanding why prosecution reform feels culturally radioactive; not a substitute for court records.

Source

Ddanzi: 만공스승 불법(佛法)강의 105강 — 기자들의 검사 짝사랑 (feat. 장영자) — Korean opinion column, published Sept. 26, 2026; paraphrased for briefing; read as analysis/opinion, not court findings or confirmed cartel evidence.