KOR
▲ Former President Yoon Suk-yeol attends the first trial of a case involving charges of obstruction of special official duties and abuse of authority to obstruct the exercise of rights, held at the Seoul Central District Court in Seocho-gu, Seoul on the 26th.
The appellate trial for former President Yoon Suk-yeol and former Minister of National Defense Kim Yong-hyun, who are accused of being the ringleaders of an insurrection, has resumed after about a month.
The court proceedings, which had been suspended after they filed motions to recuse the judges, restarted following the recent final dismissal of their recusal requests.
Former President Yoon and former Minister Kim appeared in court today (June 25) for the appellate hearing on insurrection charges, presided over by Criminal Division 12-1 of the Seoul High Court (High Court Judges Lee Seung-cheol, Cho Jin-gu, and Kim Min-a), which specializes in insurrection cases.
Noh Sang-won, former commander of the Defense Intelligence Command, and Kim Yong-gun, former military police commander of the Third ROK Army (colonel), also appeared in court.
The trial had been suspended after the four individuals filed motions for recusal around the first hearing on May 14, requesting a change in the appellate panel.
Yoon's side argued that because Criminal Division 12-1 had previously found former Prime Minister Han Duck-soo guilty of engaging in important duties related to insurrection, it had effectively acknowledged Yoon's ringleader charge as guilty as well.
On June 12, the Supreme Court finally dismissed the recusal motions.
During the hearing, the special counsel team led by Cho Eun-suk, presenting the grounds for appeal against former President Yoon, argued that the first-trial sentence of life imprisonment was too lenient and requested the court to sentence him to death, matching the prosecution's original demand.
The special counsel also requested life imprisonment for former Minister Kim and 30 years in prison for former Commander Noh, matching the demands made during the first trial.
In the first trial, they were sentenced to 30 years and 18 years in prison, respectively.
The special counsel team argued that the first-trial court erred by failing to recognize the credibility of key evidence, such as former Commander Noh's memo containing the preparation timing and purpose of the emergency martial law.
They also pointed out that the lower court's ruling—that emergency martial law failing to meet legal requirements does not automatically constitute insurrection—was an incorrect interpretation that runs counter to the precedents of the Supreme Court's En Banc Bench.
In response, former President Yoon's side reiterated their previous "message-style martial law" claim, stating, "The emergency martial law was declared with the intention of raising awareness about the crisis of constitutional destruction caused by state administration difficulties and the tyranny of the giant opposition party."
The defense attorney said, "An emergency martial law that lasted only a few hours cannot constitute insurrection under common sense and the law," adding, "Former President Yoon had absolutely no intention of maintaining martial law for a long period and only deployed a small number of troops to maintain order."
They also repeated the argument that the investigation was illegal because the prosecution and the Corruption Investigation Office for High-ranking Officials (CIO) do not have the authority to investigate insurrection charges.
They further argued that even if the charges are found guilty, the first-trial sentence of life imprisonment is too harsh, considering that former President Yoon expressed regret to the public for the confusion caused by the martial law.
The key issues in the appellate trial are expected to be whether to recognize the probative value of the so-called "Noh Sang-won notebook" and the timing of the emergency martial law conspiracy by former President Yoon and others.
Based on this notebook, which reportedly contains plans for preparing for emergency martial law and post-execution measures, the special counsel team determined that the conspiracy for emergency martial law took place in October 2023.
However, the Seoul Central District Court's Criminal Agreement Division 25 (then presided over by Chief Judge Ji Gwi-yeon), which handled the first trial, did not recognize its probative value, citing that it was difficult to determine exactly when the notebook was written.
Based on this, the lower court concluded that former President Yoon decided on martial law on December 1, 2024, two days before the declaration of emergency martial law.
On the other hand, Criminal Agreement Division 33 of the same court (presided over by Chief Judge Lee Jin-kwan), which found former Justice Minister Park Sung-jae guilty of engaging in important duties related to insurrection and sentenced him to 25 years in prison on June 22, recognized the probative value of the notebook and ruled that the martial law had been prepared since at least 2023.
(Photo: Yonhap News)
※ Please note: This article was translated by AI and may contain errors.
Video News
Video News
Video News