The Seoul Central District Court has sentenced former military leaders to prison for their roles in blocking the National Assembly and deploying troops to the National Election Commission during the 12·3 martial law crisis.
On August 27, the court's Criminal Division 37-2, led by Judges Oh Chang-seob, Ryu Chang-seong, and Jang Seong-hoon, sentenced Kim Hyun-tae, former commander of the Army Special Warfare Command's 707th Special Mission Battalion, to 12 years in prison for insurrection-related charges.
Lee Sang-hyun, former commander of the 1st Airborne Special Forces Brigade, received a 10-year sentence, while Kim Dae-woo, former head of the Defense Security Command's Investigation Division, was sentenced to 5 years.
Additionally, Kim Bong-kyu, former head of the Central Newspaper Division, and Jeong Seong-wook, former head of the 100th Brigade's 2nd Business Division, were each sentenced to 7 years for attempting to occupy the National Election Commission and arrest its staff.
The court ordered the detention of Kim Hyun-tae, Lee Sang-hyun, and Kim Dae-woo, citing concerns over flight risk and evidence tampering.
However, Park Heon-soo, former head of the Ministry of National Defense's Investigation Headquarters, and Ko Dong-hee, former head of the Intelligence Command's Planning Division, were acquitted, as the court found insufficient evidence of intent to commit insurrection or disrupt the constitutional order.
A key issue in the trial was whether the defendants had the intent to participate in insurrection and whether they were obligated to follow orders that were unconstitutional or illegal. The court characterized the actions as a 'rebellion aimed at disrupting the constitutional order,' stating that they sought to undermine the functions of constitutional institutions like the National Assembly and the National Election Commission by using armed military and police forces after former President Yoon Suk-yeol declared martial law.
The court determined that the defendants actively carried out unconstitutional orders, including preventing the National Assembly from voting on a proposal to lift martial law and attempting to arrest civilians despite lacking the authority to do so.
The court rejected the defendants' claims that they were merely following orders, emphasizing that while soldiers are obligated to obey lawful commands, they are not required to follow orders that are clearly illegal or unlawful. The actions of deploying troops to infiltrate the National Assembly, cutting off electricity to the main building, and breaking down doors to forcibly remove lawmakers were deemed illegal and beyond the scope of permissible actions under martial law.
The court specifically pointed out Kim Dae-woo's involvement in directing arrests, stating that he ordered the arrest and transfer of civilians, including politicians, despite knowing he lacked the authority to do so, which constituted a significant role in the insurrection.
Regarding Kim Bong-kyu and Jeong Seong-wook, the court noted that they had meticulously planned the illegal arrest of National Election Commission staff in collusion with a former intelligence commander, warranting severe penalties.
In its sentencing remarks, the court condemned the misuse of military power and the violation of constitutional order, stating, 'Insurrection is the most serious crime that undermines the existence of the state and the fundamental order of a free democracy.' The court criticized the defendants for abusing military power, which should have been used for national security and defense, for the benefit of specific individuals and groups.
The court emphasized that the actions of the defendants, who blindly followed illegal orders, severely damaged the honor and dignity of the Republic of Korea's military and imposed the burden of being associated with insurrection on countless soldiers who were mobilized against their will. It highlighted the extreme anxiety caused to the public and the serious damage to South Korea's international standing, asserting that legal accountability must be strictly enforced.
Furthermore, the court stressed the necessity of sending a strong message to society that such insurrectionary acts, which are utterly unacceptable in a free democratic state, will not be tolerated, to prevent any future attempts to use military force for insurrection or constitutional disruption.
* This article has been translated by AI.
Copyright ⓒ Aju Press All rights reserved.