February 27, 2025
SEOUL – The Constitutional Court’s conclusion of arguments in President Yoon Suk Yeol’s impeachment trial on Tuesday brought an end to more than two months of hearings.
In the third presidential impeachment trial in South Korea’s history, the court held a total of 11 hearings over 73 days, examining the constitutionality and legality of Yoon’s botched martial law declaration on Dec. 3.
Following Yoon’s refusal to accept the court’s notification of the impeachment trial and related documents, the first preparatory hearing took place on Dec. 27, 13 days after the case was filed. On Jan. 3, the court completed preparations in just two sessions and moved to the main hearings.
Starting with the first hearing on Jan. 14, the court proceeded with a rigorous schedule of two hearings per week, except during the Lunar New Year holiday.
The first hearing lasted only four minutes due to Yoon not attending, citing security reasons.
GRAPHICS: THE KOREA HERALD
Sixteen witnesses testified across six hearings, who took the stand to testify over the Cabinet meeting held on the night of Yoon’s attempt to impose martial law, Yoon’s alleged orders to blockade the National Assembly and his suspected orders to arrest a list of prominent politicians and opinion leaders.
Witnesses included: former Defense Minister Kim Yong-hyun, former National Intelligence Service First Deputy Director Hong Jang-won, suspended National Police Agency Commissioner General Cho Ji-ho, and former Army Special Warfare Command Commander Lt. Gen. Kwak Jong-geun.
Since his first appearance for the third hearing, Yoon actively denied the impeachment charges and repeatedly defended himself, even directly cross-examining ex-Defense Minister Kim about the number of military deployments and the situation when drafting martial law Decree No. 1.
When Yoon asked him, Kim replied to him immediately, “Now that you mention it, I remember.”
From the fifth hearing onward, key military commanders testified and the court restricted Yoon from directly questioning witnesses. Instead, the suspended president was allowed to make statements after his legal representatives completed their questioning.
The fifth hearing featured former Army Capital Defense Commander Lee Jin-woo, former Defense Counterintelligence Commander Lt. Gen. Yeo In-hyung, and former NIS First Deputy Director Hong Jang-won, focusing on allegations that Yoon had ordered the arrest of a list of approximately 14 key politicians and opinion leaders.
Hong testified that he received a direct order from Yoon on Dec. 3 to take down a list of politicians, journalists and other important figures in South Korean society for arrest.
Yoon countered by stating that his phone call with Hong was merely a gesture of encouragement and that he never issued such an order. Hong later appeared again in court as a witness bringing with him the physical list he had jotted down that night, as Yoon’s legal team pointed out problems with his testimony.
The sixth hearing centered on whether Yoon had attempted to block the National Assembly from voting to lift his martial law decree by deploying troops. Former Special Warfare Command Commander Lt. Gen. Kwak Jong-geun claimed Yoon instructed him to break down the doors and forcibly drag out the lawmakers from the Assembly’s plenary chamber. Yoon argued Kwak’s testimony was part of a “political conspiracy” against him.
Kwak said he was told by Yoon to “quickly break down the National Assembly doors and drag out all the people inside,” and that it was obvious that the “people” (“inwon” in Korean) meant the lawmakers (“uiwon”).
In the seventh hearing, they called in Baek Jong-wook, former third deputy director of the NIS, who conducted a security audit of the National Election Commission. The National Assembly’s legal team countered that election fraud was not relevant to Yoon’s impeachment case. They presented testimony from Kim Yong-bin, secretary-general of the National Election Commission, to affirm that no election fraud had occurred.
By the ninth hearing on Feb. 18, the court reviewed the evidence and arguments presented by both sides. In the tenth hearing, final witness testimonies were taken from impeached Prime Minister Han Duck-soo, former NIS First Deputy Director Hong Jang-won, and suspended National Police Commissioner General Cho Ji-ho.
During the 11th and final hearing, the legal representatives of the National Assembly and Yoon’s side delivered their closing arguments, with Rep. Jung Chung-rae, representing the side prosecuting the case, and defendant Yoon taking the floor with no time limit.
In a lengthy final argument, Yoon apologized for causing public concern but emphasized that he had intended to appeal to the public about the “imperial opposition party,” not to suppress the people as past military governments had done.
While stressing that he would not cling to his term in office, Yoon said he would focus on constitutional and political reforms in the latter half of his term, if he were to be reinstated.
“I will dedicate myself to swiftly pushing for constitutional amendments in line with the will of the people, creating a Constitution and political structure that align well with the changes in our society.”
He also indicated that he would delegate his authority to the prime minister to oversee domestic issues for him to focus on foreign affairs, citing the rapidly changing international landscape and complex global crises.
Prior to Yoon’s final argument, Rep. Jung Chung-rae, representing the National Assembly’s Impeachment Committee, argued that Yoon “must be removed from office for the sake of democracy and national progress.”
“(On the night of Dec. 3, the night of the insurrection,) the entire nation watched the armed soldiers’ violent acts live on television. The necessary and sufficient conditions to impeach the insurrection leader suspect Yoon Suk Yeol have already been reached,” he said.
“The sky clearly heard the deafening roar of the martial law troops’ helicopters, and the ground bore witness to the marching boots of the armed martial law soldiers. Even the moon’s reflection on the lake was a witness,” he added.
The remarks of Kim Gye-ri, a member of Yoon’s legal team, during closing arguments also garnered attention in some circles.
Following the conclusion of hearings, the court is set to announce the verdict date after deliberation and a vote among eight justices. A final ruling is expected around mid-March.