On September 23, the day after taking office, Defense Minister Kang Shin-chul made his first on-site visit to the Army's 25th Infantry Division in Paju, Gyeonggi Province. The 25th Division is where three service members, including a reconnaissance battalion commander, were recently injured in two separate explosions suspected to have been caused by landmines during an operation to clear a patrol path in the Demilitarized Zone (DMZ).
However, an unexpected controversy erupted following the visit. Minister Kang's attire came under intense scrutiny.
The question was whether it was appropriate for the head of the defense ministry to visit a frontline unit where troops had been injured wearing a gray business suit rather than a military uniform.
This issue was also raised during a plenary meeting of the National Assembly's National Defense Committee on September 29.
Defense Minister Kang Shin-chul explained his choice based on "regulations."
He stated that because the defense minister holds civilian status rather than being an active-duty service member, regulations prohibit him from wearing a military uniform.
However,
another controversy arose in the process. By that logic, it was interpreted to mean that all past defense ministers had broken the law.
In response, Minister Kang replied that most of his predecessors had also visited units in civilian attire.
So, what exactly do the legal provisions state? And what did past ministers wear when visiting military units—specifically, frontline units?
The SBS Fact Check team closely examined everything from the specific statutory regulations to past conventions.
First, we examined the Constitution.
The Minister of National Defense is a member of the State Council. And the Constitution stipulates that active-duty military personnel cannot be appointed as members of the State Council.
Therefore,
it is true that the defense minister holds civilian status.
Then what about a civilian wearing a military uniform? As controversy grew, the Ministry of National Defense explained to the press: "As statutory regulations provide that non-military personnel must not wear military uniforms or use or carry military equipment, it is legally correct for the defense minister not to wear a military uniform."
Upon verification, there was indeed a statute governing this. Under the Act on the Regulation of Military Uniforms and Military Equipment (the
"Military Uniform Regulation Act"), non-military personnel are prohibited in principle from wearing military uniforms
.
Looking strictly at the legal text, the answer is relatively clear.
It can be seen that a civilian defense minister not wearing an official military uniform conforms to the principles of the law.
Does that mean, then, that past defense ministers—who appeared to visit military units in military uniforms—all broke the law?
However, there is an important distinction here: whether the clothing commonly referred to as the "defense minister's military uniform" legally qualifies as a "military uniform."
First, let us look at past defense ministers visiting military units.
Looking at the photos, they wore business suits with an olive-drab jacket—a so-called "field jacket"—over them. When the SBS Fact Check team reviewed photos of incumbent defense ministers inspecting units on the Ministry of National Defense blog, their attire was consistently similar.
However, there is also an interpretation that the field jackets worn by past defense ministers cannot be regarded as identical to the "military uniform" defined by law.
"The military uniform referred to in current law means an official uniform with rank insignia attached. Because the field jackets worn by past ministers lacked official rank insignia, it can be interpreted that they fall outside the legal definition of a military uniform."
- Choi Byung-wook, Professor of National Security Studies at Sangmyung University, phone interview with the SBS Fact Check team on September 29
In fact, the concept of a military uniform under the Military Uniform Regulation Act includes "rank insignia." However, the field jackets worn by past defense ministers carried no rank insignia. Instead, only a title nameplate reading "Minister of National Defense" or a defense ministry emblem was attached. While the principle remains that defense ministers do not wear official uniforms due to their civilian status, wearing an olive-drab field jacket instead of a military uniform during troop inspections or outdoor field visits had effectively become a "convention."
Therefore, strictly speaking, saying that "defense ministers visited units wearing military uniforms until now" may not be accurate.
Even so, it is difficult to view this garment simply as an ordinary overcoat.
This is because there were distinct reasons why defense ministers wore field jackets.
Professor Choi Byung-wook explained, "Past defense ministers wore field jackets due to a combination of factors: symbolism as the top defense official, a sense of unity and shared identity with troops in the field, practical utility during on-site guidance, and operational security to minimize visibility to the enemy near the frontline fences."
While not legally a military uniform, it effectively served a symbolic role comparable to one on the ground.
This is why the media customarily described defense ministers as "visiting military units in uniform."
Of course, whether Minister Kang visiting the site in a business suit without wearing a field jacket was appropriate—the so-called
"appropriateness of attire"—is a matter of subjective judgment and cannot be an object of fact checking. Nor does it seem to be an issue that can be decided solely by legal provisions.
This is because competing political viewpoints argue that even as a civilian, it was inappropriate for a defense minister—who commands military administration and operational authority under the orders of the president—not to wear attire showing solidarity with troops, particularly at a site where service members were injured. In other words, it is viewed as a matter of consideration rather than strict adherence to principle.
Synthesizing these discussions, the SBS Fact Check team rates the claim that "by regulation, it is correct for the defense minister not to wear a military uniform" as "Mostly True."
This is because the principle itself—that a civilian defense minister cannot wear an official military uniform—is accurate.
However, as noted earlier, such principles are not everything. When a defense minister visits the field, political dimensions such as a sense of unity with service members or symbolism as the highest defense authority can also be vital considerations.
In particular, this controversy was exacerbated by the Ministry of National Defense repeatedly offering explanations without clearly defining the concept of a 'military uniform.'
Initially, when asked by reporters why Minister Kang wore a suit, the ministry explained along the lines of "an on-site inspection was urgent right after taking office," but later adopted a rather definitive stance, stating that "it is correct for the defense minister not to wear a military uniform because he is a civilian." Naturally, counterarguments emerged asking, "Does that mean all previous defense ministers broke the law?" And with Minister Kang himself stating that "previous defense ministers also all wore civilian clothes," more and more unnecessary qualifications were added.
A controversy that begins on the wrong foot makes even explanations convoluted, and perhaps stands as a symbolic scene of how an issue can escalate into a wasteful debate.
<References>
· Original video records of remarks by People Power Party lawmaker Lim Jong-deuk and Defense Minister Kang Shin-chul: National Assembly Video Record System, 439th National Assembly (Regular Session), 4th National Defense Committee Meeting https://w3.assembly.go.kr/main/player.do?ref=cal&rnum=64&mc=337&ct1=22&ct2=439&ct3=04&
· Constitution: National Law Information Center https://www.law.go.kr/lsInfoP.do?lsId=001444#0000
· Act on the Regulation of Military Uniforms and Military Equipment (Military Uniform Regulation Act): https://www.law.go.kr/법령/군복및군용장구의단속에관한법률
· Ministry of National Defense Blog: https://blog.naver.com/mnd9090
· Photo of former Defense Minister Kim Kwan-jin visiting Yeonpyeong Unit (Photo courtesy of the Ministry of National Defense): https://www.yna.co.kr/view/AKR20120307156900043
· Photo of former Defense Minister Jeong Kyeong-doo visiting a Western Front GOP (Ministry of National Defense Blog): https://blog.naver.com/mnd9090/221646563018
· Photo of former Defense Minister Shin Won-sik visiting the Marine Corps Yeonpyeong Unit (Ministry of National Defense Blog): https://blog.naver.com/mnd9090/223244407806
· Choi Byung-wook, Professor of National Security Studies at Sangmyung University, phone interview with the SBS Fact Check team, September 29
(Writer: Kim HYOJIN, Intern: Kim JUNGWON)
※
Copying, redistribution, and unauthorized use in AI training are strictly prohibited.