"Private Use of Military Power, Betrayal of the People"... Strong Rebuke

[Anchor]

The court strongly criticized former President Yoon Suk Yeol, who had consistently denied the charges. The court rebuked him for using South Korea's military power for private purposes, stating that the president, who is tasked with protecting the state and its people, instead incited war.

Jang Hun-kyung reports.

[Reporter]

Throughout the trial, former President Yoon Suk Yeol argued that the drone operations were legitimate military actions in response to North Korea's trash-filled balloons.

However, the court did not accept this claim.

The court reprimanded him, stating, "Former President Yoon intentionally sought to create a national emergency to exercise his authority to declare martial law, thereby placing the lives and property of our citizens and military at risk."

The court further rebuked him, saying, "He used South Korea's military power for private purposes unrelated to national security or the defense of the territory," adding that "he betrayed the fundamental trust of the people."

In particular, the court noted, "The crime of insurrection (foreign aggression) can lead to massive loss of life or the collapse of the state, making punishment effectively impossible after the fact, which is why it must be prevented in advance," and added that "the fact that North Korea did not actually carry out a provocation is not a mitigating factor for the defendants."

The court emphasized that severe punishment is inevitable simply for the fact that the president attempted to drive the nation into a war crisis.

[Jang Woo-sung / Special Prosecutor for Insurrection: This was a judgment on the duplicity of forces responsible for national security, who abandoned that responsibility for political interests and the maintenance of power.]

Previously, the court presiding over the charges against the ringleader of the insurrection judged that the decision to declare martial law was made two days prior, stating, "It is difficult to view this as a long-planned declaration of martial law given the lack of preparation."

However, as today's (June 12) ruling recognized the connection between the drone operations that began in October 2024 and the declaration of martial law, it is expected to influence the appellate court's judgment on the timing of the decision to commit insurrection.

(Video Editing: Jung Sung-hoon)
※ Please note: This article was translated by AI and may contain errors.