In the wake of South Korea’s fiercely contested June 3, 2026, local elections, the political landscape has been anything but calm. At the center of the latest storm stands Cho Kuk, leader of the Innovation Party (조국혁신당), who has found himself the target of a barrage of criticism and conspiracy theories—both from within his own progressive camp and from rival parties. The resulting tensions have exposed deep fractures among South Korea’s reformist forces and raised questions about the future of opposition unity against the ruling People Power Party (국민의힘).
On June 18, 2026, Cho Kuk took to Facebook to mount a vigorous defense against what he described as “malicious attacks” on himself and his party. The first salvo came from Kang Mi-jung, a former Innovation Party spokesperson, who alleged in a YouTube interview that the party had considered nominating Cho’s daughter, Cho Min, as a parliamentary candidate. Cho minced no words in his rebuttal, stating, “Following the divisive attacks within our own camp using derogatory nicknames, she now spreads absurd falsehoods to slander my daughter and the Innovation Party.” He went on to declare, “No one in my family, nor anyone in the Innovation Party, has ever considered or reviewed my daughter’s candidacy for parliament. Such behavior is truly deplorable.” (Source: Goodmorning Chungcheong)
But Kang’s claims were not the only ones to draw Cho’s ire. That same day, Sohn Hye-won, an independent council member-elect for Mokpo, suggested in a JTBC interview that the founding of the Innovation Party was orchestrated by Yang Jeong-cheol, a prominent former strategist for the main opposition Democratic Party (더불어민주당). This theory, which has been circulating in pro-Lee Jae-myung YouTube circles, posits that Yang is behind a so-called “Moon Again” movement, allegedly seeking the revival of former President Moon Jae-in’s influence through the Innovation Party. Cho flatly rejected these allegations as “delusional,” stating, “Neither I nor any key figures in the Innovation Party have ever contacted or received help from Yang Jeong-cheol before or after the party’s founding.” He added, “On what grounds and for what purpose are such false claims being made?” and called for “at least a minimum standard of political decency” from Democratic Party members who have recently been “relentlessly slandering” him and his party. (Source: Goodmorning Chungcheong)
The next day, June 19, Cho found himself in another war of words, this time with Democratic Party lawmaker Park Ji-won. Park publicly blamed Cho for “breaking the alliance” in the June 3 by-elections and argued that Cho should have withdrawn from the Pyeongtaek-eul contest to consolidate opposition votes. Cho pushed back, reminding critics that the Innovation Party had, in fact, supported Democratic Party candidates in 12 districts by withdrawing or unifying candidacies. “At the time, the Democratic Party had no intention of yielding any by-election district,” Cho argued. “Is it acceptable for the Democratic Party to field a candidate in Pyeongtaek-eul, but if the Innovation Party does, it’s considered breaking the alliance?” He continued, “In the Pyeongtaek-eul race, I criticized Kim Yong-nam’s flaws and competed against him, but I consistently maintained that unification was necessary if there was a risk of a People Power Party victory. Kim Yong-nam completely rejected unification.” (Source: Goodmorning Chungcheong)
Cho also questioned why Park, as a senior figure, did not urge both parties to pursue unification procedures rather than pressuring only him to withdraw. “Solidarity and unity are only possible when there is mutual respect between parties,” Cho insisted. “It cannot be achieved by demanding unilateral concessions from another party.” He further urged Democratic Party leaders to “uphold at least a basic courtesy to comrades in the struggle for Yoon Seok-youl’s impeachment and regime change,” and to “seriously assess how the Democratic Party’s Pyeongtaek-eul strategy negatively affected other regional races.”
The backdrop to these disputes is a broader sense of division within the Democratic Party itself. Pro-Lee Jae-myung factions, sometimes called the “New Lee Jae-myung” group, have been accused of fomenting discord and aligning with self-described pro-Myung politicians to resist merger talks with the Innovation Party. These internal rifts have spilled into public view, with some Democratic Party figures leading the charge against Cho and his party during both the merger negotiations and the recent local elections.
Meanwhile, on June 19, the Innovation Party’s new floor leader, Kim Jun-hyung, paid a courtesy visit to Democratic Party floor leader Han Byung-do at the National Assembly, marking their first meeting since Kim’s appointment on June 16. The encounter was cordial, but Kim did not mince words about the fallout from the elections. “The Innovation Party suffered significant damage in the local elections,” Kim told Han. “Whenever merger talks arise, we feel unfairly targeted.” He acknowledged that the Democratic Party had also “suffered some wounds,” but suggested that “the success of the Lee Jae-myung government and the progressive reform camp could heal these wounds through cooperation.” (Source: Yonhap News, Goodmorning Chungcheong)
Kim reiterated his party’s rejection of any immediate merger with the Democratic Party, pointing out that previous talks had been stymied by internal opposition and a lack of formal negotiations. “We endured a great deal of distress due to the back-and-forth in the media and within the Democratic Party, without any official discussions,” Kim said. “Now is not the right time, and nothing has been decided one way or the other.” (Source: Goodmorning Chungcheong)
Still, Kim left the door open to future cooperation, provided it serves the broader reformist agenda and is not merely a tool in the Democratic Party’s internal power struggles. “If it’s for the success of the Lee Jae-myung government and the progressive reform camp, we are always willing to collaborate,” he said, “but we draw the line at being used for political engineering or factional infighting within the Democratic Party.”
The June 3 by-elections in Pyeongtaek-eul offer a case in point. Both the Innovation Party and the Democratic Party fielded candidates, leading to a bruising campaign marked by negative attacks. In the end, both opposition candidates lost, allowing Yoo Ui-dong of the People Power Party to win the seat—a result many observers described as a classic case of vote-splitting handing victory to the ruling party. Kim Jun-hyung alluded to this in a YTN Radio interview, noting that “there could be a role for the Innovation Party in negotiations over filibuster suspension or in addressing the Democratic Party’s lost seats.”
Han Byung-do, for his part, emphasized the need for both parties to focus on urgent legislative priorities. “Just as when the Innovation Party was first launched, we face important tasks together, such as prosecutorial reform, normalizing related institutions, and restoring livelihoods,” Han said. “We must quickly form the parliamentary committees and convene the Legislation and Judiciary Committee to process pressing reform and livelihood bills, so that we can become a working National Assembly.” (Source: Yonhap News)
As the dust settles from the June elections, the prospects for opposition unity remain uncertain. The Innovation Party’s leadership, stung by attacks from both within and outside the progressive camp, is determined to assert its independence and principles. Yet, both Cho Kuk and Kim Jun-hyung have signaled a willingness to work with the Democratic Party—if the terms are fair and the partnership is rooted in mutual respect and shared goals. Whether these overtures can overcome the deep-seated rivalries and distrust now on display remains to be seen. For now, South Korea’s reformist opposition is at a crossroads, with the outcome likely to shape the country’s political direction in the months to come.