Eight former military officials charged with plotting to impose martial law and deploy troops to the National Assembly and the National Election Commission were acquitted in a first trial.
The Seoul Central District Court's Criminal Division 38-2, led by Judges Jeong Soo-young, Choi Young-gak, and Jang Seong-jin, delivered the not guilty verdict on October 30 for Gu Sam-hwa, former commander of the 2nd Armored Brigade, and Bang Jeong-hwan, former director of defense innovation planning.
The other six defendants, including Jeong Seong-woo, former head of the Defense Security Command's first department, Kim Jeong-geun, former commander of the 3rd Airborne Brigade, Ahn Mu-seong, former commander of the 9th Airborne Brigade, Kim Sang-yong, former deputy head of the Ministry of National Defense's investigation headquarters, Kim Chang-hak, former head of the Military Police Corps of the Capital Defense Command, and Kim Se-woon, former head of the Special Operations Aviation Group, were also acquitted.
The court determined that the prosecution failed to sufficiently prove the essential elements of treason, specifically the intent to disrupt the constitutional order and the requisite intent.
Regarding the so-called "hamburger meeting" held just before the declaration of emergency martial law, the special prosecutor's team claimed that the defendants conspired to carry out the mission of the "Second Investigation Team." However, the court found that they were merely nominal leaders and had not received detailed information or relevant documents, making it difficult for them to recognize any connection to the emergency martial law.
The court stated, "The defendants appear to have been nominal leaders of the investigation team and did not know the specifics. No information was communicated to them by Noh Sang-won, and they did not receive any documents regarding their assigned tasks."
Additionally, the court ruled that other commanders who executed orders on the day of the emergency martial law acted under the belief that their superiors' orders were legitimate and did so urgently without prior knowledge. The court found no indication that they believed they were assigning duties that were not required of them, thus rejecting the abuse of authority charges.
The court also concluded that the intelligence personnel summoned at the time likely did not know of the existence of the former brigade commander and the former planning director. It noted, "The defendants were merely instructed by the Minister of National Defense to await personnel orders and could not have known their specific roles or any connection to treason before confirming the order's content. The instruction to await personnel orders cannot be recognized as clearly unconstitutional or illegal in itself."
The special prosecutors strongly opposed the ruling and announced plans to appeal. A special prosecutor's official stated, "The unconstitutionality and illegality of the emergency martial law were recognized even by the general public, which directly contradicts the Constitutional Court and previous court rulings. If they were aware of the illegality during their mission and did not halt it, it constitutes treasonous conduct, but the court narrowly interpreted it based only on the timing of the orders."
* This article has been translated by AI.
Copyright ⓒ Aju Press All rights reserved.