Seobu District Court Riot Trial, Some Defendants Deny Charges ... "Caught While Trying to Help Others"

In the trial of the disturbance incident at the Seoul Western District Court, some defendants claimed innocence, arguing that there was no intent to unlawfully enter the court.

On the afternoon of the 19th, after President Yoon Seok-yeol was arrested on charges of being the leader of an insurrection, some of his supporters broke into the Seoul Western District Court building, causing an illegal violent incident. Court officials at the Western District Court were cleaning up and restoring damaged facilities and items. Photo by Yonhap News.

The Criminal Division 11 of the Seoul Western District Court (Chief Judge Kim Woo-hyun) held a hearing on the 19th at 10 a.m. for 16 defendants charged with special trespassing.

They were indicted for unlawfully entering the premises of the Seoul Western District Court after an arrest warrant was issued for President Yoon Seok-yeol in the early morning of January 19. Among them, some even entered up to the 7th floor of the court building. The defendants’ occupations varied, including Korean medicine doctors, construction company CEOs, and unemployed individuals.

Among the 16 defendants tried that day, half?8 defendants?denied the prosecution’s charges. Some claimed a right to resist against what they considered an unjust investigation by the state targeting President Yoon, while others argued they entered the court either to help someone else or to prevent further trouble.

The first trial of the 'Seobu District Court disturbance incident' was held on the 10th, and lawyer Lee Hasang is speaking in front of the Seobu District Court in Mapo-gu, Seoul. Photo by Yonhap News

Defendants including Jang claimed that they entered the court premises not at 3 a.m., as the prosecution stated, but later when the court doors were already open, and thus entered without any obstruction, asserting their innocence.

The defense attorney for defendant Park acknowledged that the defendant entered the court premises but stated that he was caught by the police after entering to assist someone who requested help.

The defense attorney for defendant Lee said, "The defendant is also a journalist and had the purpose of reporting," adding, "He also intended to bring out three other youths to stop their criminal acts."

The prosecution and defense engaged in a heated debate over whether the defendants should be considered accomplices under criminal law. The defense argued, "The defendants are strangers to each other, and the indictment does not list them as accomplices, yet the indictment describes the acts as joint crimes," adding, "Despite completely different facts for each defendant, they are treated as accomplices, which imposes many restrictions."

In response, the prosecution said, "Although they were not indicted as accomplices, the fact that they unlawfully entered the court is the same, the location is the same, and the time frame is close," and added, "Because they used the power of a group and multiple people, the use of the term 'joint' is at the prosecutor’s discretion."

After the trial, a bail hearing was held for three defendants. The defendants applied for bail, citing reasons such as their livelihoods and no risk of flight, while the prosecution requested denial.

Former Prime Minister Hwang Kyo-ahn is making a denunciation speech at an anti-impeachment rally for President Yoon Seok-yeol held on the 28th of last month in front of Sungkyunkwan University in Jongno-gu, Seoul. Photo by Yonhap News

Meanwhile, former Prime Minister Hwang Kyo-ahn and others, who appeared as lawyers at the trial that day, reiterated the defendants’ right to resist.

Former Prime Minister Hwang said, "The Corruption Investigation Office for High-ranking Officials is conducting investigations without investigative authority, and the procedures are seriously flawed," adding, "They came out to resist the president’s arrest, but being detained for two months is something that needs to be corrected." When Hwang finished speaking, the defendants’ families seated in the gallery applauded.

The second hearing for these 16 defendants is scheduled for 2:30 p.m. on the 26th. Due to the large number of defendants in the Western District Court disturbance case, the trials are being conducted in divided groups. On the 10th and 17th, trials were held for 23 and 20 defendants, respectively.