At the current stage, whether Ming Zhuo has truly betrayed Luo Mountain is still in the realm of accusation and suspicion.
Impermanence does not necessarily require evidence to take action; suspicion alone suffices. Ming Zhuo already has sufficient motive to join the Evangelical Institute; it would be more surprising if he did not. Although demanding that someone prove their innocence violates fundamental legal principles, falling into the category of presumption of guilt, what law can arbitrate disputes among Impermanence? Currently, Ming Zhuo finds himself in a situation where he must prove his innocence.
If a basic consensus is reached among the Impermanence, I can bypass the debate and directly strike against Ming Zhuo without much criticism theoretically. However, Fa Zheng is clearly an outlier in this regard, as he seems to insist on fairness and justice, believing that without evidence, no matter how great the suspicion, Ming Zhuo cannot be deemed a traitor to Luo Mountain.
