Concerns Raised Over Missing Military Positions During Emergency Martial Law

Concerns have emerged regarding the absence of significant military positions on the operational map of the Joint Chiefs of Staff during the emergency martial law declared on December 3. This issue is linked to testimonies in court suggesting that former President Yoon Suk Yeol personally verified the positions of the martial law troops as they headed to the National Assembly. The whistleblower claims that an investigation should determine whether a limited number of individuals were illegally sharing the situation.

According to a report by Aju Economy on July 26, Kim Hyun-seok, who has participated in the development of military command and control systems for nearly 30 years, submitted whistleblower documents to the National Investigation Agency and the second comprehensive special investigation team. He asserted that only a few units were marked on the operational map during the emergency martial law, and the movements of many martial law troops were untraceable.
Kim explained that numerous testimonies revealed during field investigations and trials related to insurrection cases indicate that the operational map of the Joint Chiefs of Staff was not functioning properly.

Former Special Warfare Command Chief Kwak Jong-geun testified that on December 6, during a visit by members of the Democratic Party to the Special Forces, Yoon called to inquire about the location of the 707th Special Mission Battalion, recalling that it was on a secure phone. He noted that it was around the middle of the operation, although he could not remember the exact time.

During the trial concerning Yoon's insurrection charges, Colonel Noh Jae-heon, the legal officer of the Special Forces, stated that he reported to the Special Forces combat control room immediately after the declaration of emergency martial law and witnessed Kwak reporting troop movements to Yoon as they were deployed to the National Assembly.

Kim Hyun-tae, former head of the 707th Special Mission Battalion, also testified that they utilized a Telegram group of key personnel during the emergency martial law, indicating that they operated outside the normal command structure.

Kim stated, "The commander of the military should be able to verify troop positions on the operational map under normal command structure. The fact that Yoon had to call to confirm troop locations raises questions about the operational map's effectiveness."

He emphasized that the issue is not merely the absence of troop positions but rather the reasons behind such operations. He pointed out that if only some troops were marked, it suggests that the designers of the emergency martial law may have intended to share operational information with a very limited group. He urged that the original documents remaining with the Joint Chiefs of Staff and the Special Forces should be examined to determine who made such decisions and why.

A military security expert, who requested anonymity, responded to Aju Economy's inquiry about whether troops could operate outside the command and control network during Special Forces operations by citing the December 12 military coup as a historical example.

He noted that while the command and control system was not as developed in the past, troops could operate outside normal command by intentionally failing to respond to radio calls or reports. He stated, "If troops operated outside the command structure with malicious intent, that would be wrong."

Other military experts added that maintaining communication is a principle in military operations, although there are instances in special operations where equipment may be temporarily powered down to prevent location exposure.

A former high-ranking military official remarked, "If one can effectively operate without needing to receive reports on troop positions, it raises suspicions about why they would instruct to turn off communications. The concern is that the positions of the martial law troops could be exposed and recorded, allowing for later verification of their routes." He suggested that those involved were likely aware that the martial law was illegal, making it prudent to conceal troop locations.

In the legal community, if the whistleblower's claims are confirmed, the manner in which the military command and control system was operated at that time could serve as critical evidence in determining charges of insurrection and rebellion.

Attorney Byeon Geun-sik, a specialist in military law, stated, "Deliberately bypassing or blocking the command and control system could be subject to charges of rebellion under military law (Article 5), insurrection under the Criminal Code (Article 87), and violation of orders under military law (Article 47)."

He added, "If the higher command operated troops while bypassing or blocking normal control, it could be key evidence in proving intent and initiation of rebellion. If combined with the purpose of violating the constitution, it could also be evaluated as part of the 'riot' described in the Criminal Code regarding insurrection."

Furthermore, he noted that the Supreme Court has previously ruled that actions taken by the new military government to mobilize troops while blocking or neutralizing legitimate command and reporting channels were deemed illegal resistance against military command and authority, referencing the December 12 military coup case (Supreme Court 96Do3376).

He concluded, "Deliberately undermining the normal command and control system is not merely a disciplinary violation but could serve as significant evidence of intent to seize command and violate the constitution."