Yoon's Side: "Hasty Warrant Omits Foreign Exchange Charges... No Grounds for Re-detention"

"Reckless Warrant Request Amid Incomplete Investigation"
"Criminal Procedure Act Restricts Re-detention for the Same Offense"
"No Realistic Risk of Flight or Evidence Tampering"

Former President Yoon Seokyeol's legal team stated on the 9th that the arrest warrant requested by Special Prosecutor Cho Eunseok's team for the December 3 emergency martial law case did not include any charges related to foreign exchange offenses.

After completing the pre-arrest detention hearing (warrant review) that lasted about 6 hours and 40 minutes from 2:15 p.m. that day, Yoon's legal team released a summary argument, saying, "This was a hasty warrant request in a situation where the lack of investigation is clear."

The legal team argued, "The special prosecutor announced during a press briefing on the 4th that a significant number of military officials had been questioned regarding the foreign exchange charges. However, during the investigation of former President Yoon, the special prosecutor's questions were only at the level of basic inquiries regarding suspicions."

They further pointed out, "Following the request and dismissal of the arrest warrant, this shows just how hastily the special prosecutor's investigation has been conducted."

Former President Yoon Seokyeol, who is accused of insurrection related to the emergency martial law situation on December 3, is moving to the Seoul Detention Center, the waiting area, after completing the pre-arrest detention hearing (warrant review) at the Seoul Central District Court in Seocho-gu, Seoul on the 9th. Photo by Yonhap News Agency Joint Coverage Team

The legal team stated, "Criminal Procedure Act Article 208 stipulates that a person who has been released from detention cannot be detained again for the same criminal facts, except when new important evidence is discovered. The acts listed by the special prosecutor as criminal facts?obstructing Cabinet deliberations, drafting false official documents, public communications through a foreign press spokesperson, and actions related to secret phone call records?are all acts that occurred simultaneously with, or as means and results of, the insurrection charge, and therefore fall under the grounds restricting re-detention."

Regarding the special prosecutor's issue with not convening all Cabinet members before declaring emergency martial law, the legal team countered, "If we follow the special prosecutor's logic, convening a Cabinet meeting and reviewing the lifting of martial law within one minute as soon as a quorum was reached after the National Assembly's resolution to lift martial law would also be considered illegal."

On the possibility of Yoon fleeing, the legal team said, "The concern that a former president might flee is, in itself, contrary to common sense. Former President Yoon has no power since leaving office," and added, "In a situation where lies are rampant in an attempt to shift all responsibility to the president during National Assembly hearings and criminal trials, it is impossible for former President Yoon to exert influence to destroy evidence or alter testimonies."

They continued, "The argument that impeachment means guilt, and guilt means detention, denies the rule of law and risks returning the Republic of Korea to an era of totalitarian abuse of power," adding, "We ask the judiciary, the last bastion of the rule of law, to clearly uphold justice and principle."

Regarding concerns about destruction of evidence and harm to key witnesses, the legal team said, "Due to competitive investigations by the police, the prosecution, and the Corruption Investigation Office for High-ranking Officials, as well as the largest-ever special prosecutor investigation, most related individuals have already been detained and are on trial," and added, "All relevant physical evidence has also been secured through search and seizure."

On the risk of recidivism, the legal team argued, "Regarding the (riot) incident at the Seoul Western District Court, former President Yoon was detained at the Seoul Detention Center at the time and is therefore unrelated," adding, "Former President Yoon has never incited or instructed the use of force against any judicial decision under any circumstances."