Sangcheol’s Legal Journal : YouLaw Insights

  Introduction Hello everyone, and welcome back to my blog. Today, I want to talk about a topic that has shaken South Korea to its core. As many of you may have seen in the news, former President Moon Jae-in has been indicted on bribery charges . This development has not only surprised the political world but also left the general public in shock and disbelief. Moon Jae-in, known for his strong emphasis on fairness and justice during his presidency, now finds himself at the center of a serious legal and political controversy. Many people are struggling to believe that a figure who built his political career on integrity could be standing trial for corruption . This isn’t just another legal dispute. It raises fundamental questions about political trust , the use of power , and the very values that South Korean society holds dear. In this post, we’ll take a closer look at: The bribery charges against former President Moon Jae-in, His connection to former lawmaker L...

Can Former President Yoon Suk-yeol Run Again? Legal Barriers and Political Symbolism Explained In early April 2025, a political phrase began circulating at conservative rallies across South Korea: “YOON AGAIN.” This slogan, simple yet provocative, alludes to the idea of former President Yoon Suk-yeol making a comeback and running in the next presidential election. Originating from a prison letter written by former Minister of National Defense Kim Yong-hyun, the phrase has quickly gained traction among conservative circles both on the streets and online forums. But a crucial legal question arises: Is it even constitutionally possible for Yoon Suk-yeol to run for president again? The Symbolism Behind “YOON AGAIN” The slogan was first introduced through a handwritten letter by Kim Yong-hyun, who called for a political revival of Yoon, praising his firm stance on North Korea and legal reform efforts during his tenure. Supporters have since embraced “YOON AGAIN” as more than a slogan ...

Hello everyone! 👋 Today’s blog post covers an extraordinary moment in Korean constitutional history.  On April 4, 2025 , the Constitutional Court of Korea issued a landmark ruling: the dismissal of President Yoon Suk-yeol from office. Let’s explore what happened, why it happened, and what this means for democracy in Korea. 🧭 Background of the Case The impeachment process began after President Yoon declared martial law on December 3, 2024 , citing national paralysis due to opposition party actions and threats from North Korea. The declaration was made through a live national broadcast and included assigning a military general as the martial law commander. However, within hours, the National Assembly voted unanimously (190/190) to revoke the martial law. On December 4, President Yoon announced the termination of the martial law . Despite this retraction, political and legal responses escalated. A second impeachment motion was proposed and passed on December 14 with 204 ...

  In a historic and politically charged moment, the Constitutional Court of South Korea is set to deliver its final verdict on the impeachment of President Yoon Suk-yeol. The court announced that the decision will be made public on Friday, April 4, 2025, at 11:00 AM , at the Grand Courtroom in Jongno-gu, Seoul. The announcement follows 111 days after the National Assembly passed the impeachment motion and 38 days after the final hearings concluded on March 25. The outcome of this ruling holds significant implications not just for the current administration but for the broader framework of constitutional law and democratic governance in South Korea. This pivotal moment comes amidst growing scrutiny from both political circles and the public, as the nation stands at the crossroads of legal accountability and executive authority. A Decision with Immediate Impact The court's verdict will determine whether President Yoon will continue to lead the country or be permanently removed f...

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...