[ad_1]
Han Duck-soo, who was South Korea’s prime minister on the time of the Dec. 3, 2024, martial legislation disaster, attends the studying of the decision in his trial on prices of performing important duties in service of an riot, held on Jan. 21, 2026, on the Seoul Central District Court docket. (nonetheless from video supplied by Seoul Central District Court docket)
On Wednesday, former Prime Minister Han Duck-soo was discovered responsible of participating in important actions in an riot. This preliminary ruling adopted a two-part construction. First, the courtroom decided whether or not the Dec. 3 declaration of martial legislation constituted an riot, then it examined whether or not the prime minister, because the second-highest official within the state, participated in insurrectionary acts.
The courtroom confirmed each counts, concluding that Han actively participated within the riot led by former President Yoon Suk-yeol.
With lower than a month left till the Seoul Central District Court docket delivers its Feb. 19 verdict in Yoon’s trial on prices of performing because the ringleader of an riot, courts proceed to challenge judicial rulings recognizing the legality of the investigation into the martial legislation disaster and establishing that the declaration of martial legislation constituted an act of riot.
Martial legislation disaster was an “riot,” outlined as “violence for the aim of subverting the Structure”
Article 87 of Korea’s Legal Act defines riot as “violence for the aim of usurping the nationwide territory or subverting the Structure,” that’s, to disrupt or destroy the constitutional order.
In his ruling on Han’s case, Decide Lee Jin-gwan of the Seoul Central District Court docket identified that Yoon “created the appearance of a Cupboard dialogue, declared martial legislation, issued a proclamation denying the parliamentary and celebration procedures assured by the Structure, and mobilized army forces and cops to occupy the Nationwide Meeting and the Nationwide Election Fee.”
Yoon “managed entry to those buildings or carried out search and seizures,” the decide added, stating that the courtroom acknowledges that Yoon “directed a large number of people to hitch forces with the intent to undermine the constitutional order, exercised tangible drive, and brought on hurt, thereby inciting violence with ample drive to disturb the peace of a locality.”
For this reason the courtroom explicitly outlined Yoon’s martial legislation declaration because the “Dec. 3 riot.”
Han Duck-soo, the previous prime minister of South Korea, arrives on the Seoul Central District Court docket within the metropolis’s Seocho District on Jan. 21, 2026, for the studying of the decision in his trial of participating in important actions in service of an riot for his function within the declaration of martial legislation by former President Yoon Suk-yeol. (Yonhap)
Han “ordered energy and water cuts to media shops”
The courtroom decided that Han performed an energetic function in Yoon’s riot try by advising the previous president to carry a Cupboard assembly to offer his unlawful declaration of martial legislation a patina of procedural legitimacy, and making an attempt to obtain Cupboard members’ signatures on martial law-related paperwork after the state of emergency had been declared.
Though Han claimed he tried to dissuade Yoon from declaring martial legislation, the courtroom acknowledged, “Quite the opposite, the defendant was concerned in Yoon selectively convening just some Cupboard members to fulfill the quorum requirement for a Cupboard assembly.”
Whereas the assembly might have been carried out remotely, permitting ministers staying within the administrative capital of Sejong to take part through video convention, the courtroom identified that there was “no proof to counsel the defendant proposed holding the Cupboard assembly through video convention.”
Moreover, primarily based on CCTV footage from the presidential workplace, the courtroom decided that Han “mentioned the content material, foundation and implementation plans for the order to chop off electrical energy and water to particular media shops with Lee Sang-min, [former minister of the interior and safety,]” and “inspired the execution of that order.”
“The defendant in the end forsook his duties and duties [as prime minister] out of a perception that the Dec. 3 riot would possibly succeed, and as a substitute selected to take part” within the riot, the courtroom defined.
What this resolution means for Yoon
This verdict is predicted to affect the upcoming courtroom choices associated to the riot.
Yoon has maintained that his declaration of martial legislation was merely a “warning” supposed to sign a nationwide disaster, with out the aim of undermining the Structure, and that the deployment of army and police forces was to keep up order. Nevertheless, the courtroom in Han’s case rejected Yoon’s protection on a number of grounds. Whereas the primary ruling for Yoon’s riot case falls to Decide Jee Kui-youn of the Seoul Central District Court docket, who has been topic to criticism for beforehand ordering Yoon’s launch from pre-trial detention, the prevailing view in authorized circles is that no courtroom can deny that Yoon dedicated riot.
As Han obtained a sentence exceeding the prosecutors’ demand of 15 years, heavy sentences are additionally anticipated for Lee Sang-min and former Minister of Justice Park Sung-jae, who have been indicted for performing key duties in service of an riot as they have been summoned earlier than the Cupboard assembly for the Dec. 3 martial legislation declaration.
A verdict shall be reached for Kim Yong-hyun, the previous minister of nationwide protection who served because the second-in-command and mastermind of the riot, alongside Yoon, on Feb. 19.
By Park Ji-young, workers reporter
Please direct questions or feedback to [english@hani.co.kr]
[ad_2]
