South Korea’s martial law trial reached a decisive moment Friday as prosecutors sought a 10-year prison sentence. The request targeted former President Yoon Suk Yeol, marking the first sentencing demand among cases tied to the emergency decree.
The sentencing request came during a closing hearing at the Seoul Central District Court. Prosecutors accused Yoon of obstructing the execution of an arrest warrant and abusing constitutional authority during the Dec. 3, 2024 declaration.
Specifically, the special counsel requested five years in prison for obstructing law enforcement efforts to carry out the arrest. Prosecutors argued that Yoon interfered directly, undermining the rule of law.
In addition, prosecutors sought three years for violating Cabinet members’ constitutional rights. They said Yoon bypassed their authority to deliberate and vote on the martial law declaration.
Those charges also included allegations of attempting to spread false information to foreign media. Prosecutors further accused Yoon of ordering the deletion of secure presidential phone records.
An additional two-year sentence was requested for allegedly fabricating the written proclamation of martial law. Together, the requests brought the total proposed sentence to 10 years.
During closing arguments, prosecutors said Yoon betrayed public trust and failed his duty to protect constitutional order. They emphasized that all presidential authority derives from the people.
Moreover, prosecutors argued that a strict sentence would deter future leaders from abusing emergency powers. They stressed that equality before the law must apply even to former presidents.
Planned witness testimony from former Interior Minister Lee Sang-min and former Finance Minister Choi Sang-mok was canceled. Both failed to appear in court, prompting judges to proceed without their examinations.
Observers reported that Yoon sat silently during arguments, occasionally conferring with his legal team. He reacted briefly when prosecutors discussed alleged destruction of communication records.
Judges indicated the court aims to issue a verdict by Jan. 16. That timeline aligns with legal requirements under the special counsel statute.
If delivered on schedule, the ruling would come just before Yoon’s detention period expires on Jan. 18. It would also represent the first verdict among four related criminal cases.
Legal analysts say the decision could shape outcomes in remaining trials involving overlapping facts. As a result, the martial law trial may serve as an early benchmark for judicial accountability.
Political observers note the case highlights South Korea’s institutional response to executive overreach. Public attention now centers on the court’s forthcoming judgment.
