Yoon Suk Yeol's appeal ruling regarding false statements made during his presidential campaign is set for November 4. If a disqualification sentence is ultimately confirmed, the People Power Party will be required to return approximately 39.7 billion won in election expenses. The appeal trial concerning insurrection charges, where the special prosecutor is again seeking the death penalty, is also expected to conclude this week.
According to legal sources on November 1, the Seoul High Court's Criminal Division 2-1 (Judges Baek Seung-yeop, Hwang Seung-tae, and Kim Young-hyun) will hold a ruling session on Yoon's appeal for election law violations at 2 p.m. on November 4. The court has approved a request from the Kim Geon-hee special prosecutor's team (Special Prosecutor Min Jung-ki) to broadcast the ruling live, which will be transmitted in real-time using the court's own equipment.
Yoon was indicted last December for allegedly making false statements during a discussion hosted by the Kwanhun Club on December 14, 2021, where he claimed he had not introduced a lawyer to Yoon Woo-jin, the former head of the Yongsan Tax Office. Yoon Woo-jin is the brother of Yoon Dae-jin, a close associate of Yoon from his time in the prosecution.
The special prosecutor believes that Yoon introduced lawyer Lee Nam-seok to Yoon Woo-jin while serving as the head of the Central Investigation Department at the Supreme Prosecutors' Office in 2012, but denied it during the election campaign due to concerns over declining approval ratings.
Yoon is also accused of making false statements during an interview at the launch of the Buddhist Leaders Forum on January 17, 2022, where he claimed he was introduced to Jeon Seong-bae, known as 'Ganjin Beopsa,' by party officials and had never met him with Kim Geon-hee. The special prosecutor contends that Yoon met Jeon through Kim and maintained a long-term relationship.
In July, the first trial found Yoon guilty on both charges, sentencing him to one year and six months in prison with a three-year probation. The special prosecutor requested on October 13 during the appeal's conclusion hearing that Yoon's appeal be dismissed and the original sentence be upheld. In contrast, Yoon's defense argues that the statements cannot be considered false when viewed in context.
This ruling is closely tied to the issue of the People Power Party's return of election expenses. If Yoon receives a disqualification sentence of over 1 million won, the party will have to return the approximately 39.7 billion won it received during the 20th presidential election to the National Election Commission. However, even if the appeal court upholds the conviction, the return of funds will ultimately be determined by the Supreme Court if an appeal is filed.
The appeal regarding the insurrection charges related to the December 3 martial law is nearing its conclusion, with final arguments pending. The Seoul High Court's Criminal Division 12-1 (Judges Lee Seung-cheol, Jo Jin-goo, and Kim Min-a) will hear the final arguments from the defense of former Defense Minister Kim Yong-hyun on November 3, followed by Yoon's defense and final statements from each defendant on November 5. Unless there are special circumstances, the court plans to conclude the arguments on that day.
The insurrection special prosecutor's team (Special Prosecutor Jo Eun-seok) sought the same death penalty for Yoon as in the first trial during the conclusion hearing on October 29. They also requested life imprisonment for Kim. Previously, the first trial sentenced Yoon to life imprisonment and Kim to 30 years in prison.
During the appeal, both sides debated the purpose and level of preparation for the martial law, as well as the appropriateness of the mitigating circumstances recognized in the first trial. The special prosecutor characterized the martial law as a coup prepared for long-term rule, arguing that the first trial overly restricted the assessment of the preparation period and purpose of the crime. They maintain that evidence, including military personnel documents and the notebook of former Intelligence Command Chief Noh Sang-won, indicates that preparations for the martial law lasted at least eight months.
The special prosecutor also criticized the court for considering the brief duration of the martial law and the restraint shown by military and police forces as favorable factors for Yoon's sentencing. They stated, "Defendant Yoon Suk Yeol, who betrayed the people, must be punished with the maximum penalty allowed by law."
Yoon's defense countered that the martial law was a measure to inform the public of a national crisis and did not meet the criteria for insurrection. The defense team criticized the special prosecutor's death penalty request as "a parrot-like demand lacking legal basis, evidence, and common sense," asserting Yoon's innocence.
* This article has been translated by AI.
Copyright ⓒ Aju Press All rights reserved.