Sangcheol’s Legal Journal : YouLaw Insights

Introduction On March 24, 2025, the Constitutional Court of Korea made a historic decision to dismiss the impeachment petition against Prime Minister Han Duck-soo , who was serving as the acting President at the time. This unprecedented case went beyond politics, sparking profound discussions on constitutional interpretation, the structure of executive power, and the rule of law. This blog post provides a comprehensive breakdown of this extraordinary event in Korea’s constitutional history, analyzing the background, legal issues, and implications for the future. Background of the Case December 14, 2024 : President Yoon Suk-yeol was impeached by the National Assembly. Prime Minister Han Duck-soo assumed the role of acting President. December 26, 2024 : 170 lawmakers submitted an impeachment bill against Han. December 27, 2024 : The National Assembly passed the impeachment motion with 192 votes in favor , sending the case to the Constitutional Court. This was the first time...

🔍 Supreme Court Precedents: No Mention of Unconstitutionality in Immediate Appeals In May 2023, the South Korean Supreme Court’s Second Division reviewed a case concerning a re-appeal filed by prosecutors against the Daejeon District Court’s decision to grant a release request. The Supreme Court ruled, “Upon reviewing the reasons for the re-appeal, we find no violation of the Constitution, laws, orders, or regulations.” In other words, even though the prosecution had filed an immediate appeal after releasing the defendant, the Supreme Court did not raise any constitutional concerns regarding this practice. This case originated in November 2022 when the Daejeon District Court, on its own authority, ordered a release. The prosecution complied by releasing the defendant but simultaneously filed an immediate appeal. This precedent contradicts the current prosecution’s argument that “immediate appeal after release is unconstitutional.” ⚖️ Prosecution’s Argument vs. Supreme Court Pr...

  A Judicial Precedent Under Scrutiny The recent decision by a South Korean court to cancel President Yoon Suk-yeol’s detention and release him has triggered intense public debate. However, what has fueled even greater controversy is the prosecution's choice to forgo an immediate appeal. The Special Investigation Unit (SIU) of the prosecution advocated for an appeal, but the Supreme Prosecutors’ Office overruled it, leading to Yoon’s release. Was this prosecutorial decision justified? This event raises serious questions about the independence of the prosecution and its legal standards. A Unprecedented Legal Shift: Court’s Decision to Cancel Detention The court’s decision significantly deviated from existing legal precedents. It adopted an unusual approach to calculating the detention period, using an ‘hour’ basis instead of the conventional ‘day’ standard. Specifically, the court ruled that the time spent in the pre-detention hearing should be excluded from the detention durat...

  One of the biggest political controversies in South Korea today is whether Democratic Party leader Lee Jae-myung’s criminal trial can continue if he is elected president. Article 84 of the Constitution states: “The President shall not be subject to criminal prosecution during his tenure, except in cases of insurrection or treason.” This raises the question: Will ongoing criminal trials be suspended if a defendant becomes president? The legal community is divided on this issue. Some argue that a president’s criminal trial should automatically be suspended, while others contend that the trial must continue. This is not merely a matter of legal interpretation but a fundamental issue that could impact South Korea’s judicial system and presidential authority. This article examines the legal debate surrounding Article 84, the associated legal and practical challenges, and possible future scenarios. Legal Issues and Expert Opinions 1. The Meaning and Interpretation of Article 8...

Overview of the Hearing Date: February 25, 2025, 2:00 PM Location: Constitutional Court, Supreme Court Hall Participants: National Assembly representatives, President Yoon Suk-yeol's defense team, President Yoon Suk-yeol The 11th and final hearing of the impeachment trial for South Korean President Yoon Suk-yeol took place on February 25, 2025. President Yoon delivered his closing statement for 67 minutes, defending the necessity of martial law and addressing allegations of election fraud. The National Assembly representatives countered with strong accusations of constitutional violations and attempted subversion of the democratic republic. Key Arguments Presented A. President Yoon Suk-yeol's Closing Statement 1. Justification of Martial Law President Yoon argued that the "martial law declared on December 3 was fundamentally different from past examples," emphasizing it was a "plea to the public" rather than an oppressive military measure. He...

One of the Most Controversial Events in Modern South Korean History: The ‘10.26 Incident’ and the Recent Court Decision A South Korean court has decided to reopen the retrial of the late Kim Jae-gyu , the former director of the Korean Central Intelligence Agency (KCIA), bringing the 10.26 Incident back into legal and historical evaluation after 45 years. This retrial is not merely a reconsideration of a past event but a significant opportunity to reassess the fairness of the original trial and to determine whether Kim’s actions were truly an act of insurrectional murder or a resistance effort to restore democracy . 🔍 What is the 10.26 Incident ? The 10.26 Incident refers to the assassination of President Park Chung-hee and Presidential Security Chief Cha Ji-chul by KCIA Director Kim Jae-gyu on October 26, 1979 . This incident marked the end of the Yushin regime and brought about a significant shift in South Korea’s political landscape. Following the assassination, Kim Jae...

  Hello! Today, I’d like to introduce a book that delves into the essence of diplomacy during the Joseon Dynasty and the lessons it offers for modern South Korean diplomacy— “Father’s Shadow.” This book focuses on the Manchu invasions of 1627 and 1636 and explains why Joseon chose a desperate resistance and continued to cling to the unrealistic Northern Expedition Theory afterward. It provides an in-depth analysis of how Joseon’s diplomatic policies were intrinsically tied to its national identity. However, the book does not merely analyze the past; it also raises the question of how the diplomatic patterns from late Joseon to the Korean Empire continue to influence South Korea’s diplomacy today. Given the complex international landscape we face, this book prompts us to reflect on the lessons we should learn. 🔎 1. Why Were the Manchu Invasions More Devastating for Joseon? 📌 Imjin War vs. Manchu Invasions Joseon suffered devastating invasions during the Imjin War (1...