Seoul – South Korean prosecutors issued an arrest warrant for former Defense Minister Kim Yong-hyun, accusing him of working with President Yoon Seok-yeol to plot an insurrection during the controversial Dec. 3 martial law order. It marked a significant development in the investigation, as prosecutors identified Yun as the central figure behind the alleged coup attempt.
Kim Jong-un, who has been summoned by a special prosecution investigation team on charges of rebellion, abuse of power and other charges, decided to forgo a court hearing on Tuesday. He apologized to the people and said: “I deeply regret causing serious disturbance and discomfort to the people. I bear full responsibility for this incident.
The court initially scheduled a pre-detention hearing for Kim on Tuesday at 3 p.m. However, with King’s decision to waive the hearing, the court will now decide whether to issue a writ for King based solely on documents submitted by prosecutors and their legal counsel. The ruling will mark the first time the justice department has assessed whether martial law amounts to rebellion.
Prosecutors said they were seeking an arrest warrant out of concern that Kim, the main suspect who raised martial law against Yoon, might try to escape or tamper with evidence because he changed his cell phone after martial law was declared.
The prosecutor’s office’s Special Investigation Division, led by Seoul senior prosecutor Park Se-hyun, accused Kim of engaging in key insurgency-related tasks and abusing his power to obstruct the government’s exercise of power. Prosecutors said Kim advised Yun to illegally declare martial law and directed the military to intervene in the National Assembly and the National Election Commission.
According to prosecutors, Kim Jong Un worked with senior military and law enforcement officials to plan operations aimed at suppressing legislative power. They claimed that these actions constituted an attempt to undermine the constitutional order and were punishable under article 87 of the Criminal Code.
However, prosecutors appear to have made it clear that Kim Jong-un’s role was crucial but secondary to Yun, who has been described as the mastermind behind martial law. By targeting Kim Jong Un, investigators are preparing to expand their investigation to include Yun and other senior officials.
Under Korean law, those involved in a rebellion can be classified as leaders, participants in the planning or execution, or individuals who simply carry out orders. Prosecutors reportedly classified King as a person with important tasks, rather than a ringleader.
Prosecutors argued that the declaration of martial law was aimed at overturning the National Assembly’s constitutionally protected functions. They point to the deployment of the military to block access to the National Assembly and prevent a vote to abolish martial law as evidence of an attempt to undermine constitutional rule.
Although martial law was lifted within six hours of Congress’ decision, prosecutors argued that the intent to disrupt constitutional order was enough to meet the legal definition of insurrection.
Kim’s long-term relationship with Yoon, whom he met in high school, adds another layer of intrigue to the case. Kim Jong Un tendered his resignation on December 4 (the day martial law was lifted) and was immediately fired by the president. After initially refusing to respond to a prosecutor’s summons, he later turned himself in for questioning early Sunday morning.
The court is expected to make a decision on Kim’s arrest late Tuesday or early Wednesday.
However, questions surrounding the legitimacy and role of prosecutors in the case are growing. The investigation has become a battleground between South Korea’s prosecutors, police and anti-corruption agencies, with critics raising concerns about jurisdictional overreach and conflicts of interest.
Cho Kook, leader of the small opposition Reconstruction Korea Party, called on prosecutors to withdraw from the martial law investigation, citing their history of leniency in politically sensitive cases.
He argued that prosecutors had no jurisdiction over the rebellion charges and that their record, such as clearing first lady Kim Kun-hee in the luxury handbag scandal, damaged their credibility.
Cao further accused prosecutors of using the investigation for political manipulation. “Prosecutors have long protected the Yoon-Kim administration for their own interests, and are now baring their teeth against their masters as the regime falters,” he said.
He also warned that prosecutors’ involvement could taint the case and could lead to the court being dismissed over jurisdictional disputes.
