Detention Review for 'Insurrection Conspiracy' Lee Sangmin Concludes... Decision on Continued Detention Expected as Early as Today

Special Prosecutor Submits 110-Page Opinion to Argue for Continued Detention
Lee Sangmin Appears in Person to Defend Himself

The hearing for the review of the legality of the detention of former Minister of the Interior and Safety Lee Sangmin, who was arrested on suspicion of conspiracy related to emergency martial law and other charges, was held on the afternoon of August 8. A decision on whether Lee will be released could come as early as late this evening.

Former Minister of the Interior and Safety Lee Sangmin, who is accused of power and water outages at media companies, perjury, and engaging in important duties related to insurrection, remained silent in response to reporters' questions as he appeared before the Special Prosecutor for Insurrection led by Cho Eunseok in Seocho-dong, Seoul on July 25, 2025. Photo by Jo Yongjun

The Seoul Central District Court’s Criminal Appellate Division 8-1 (Presiding Judges Cha Seunghwan, Ryu Changseong, Choi Haeil, and Choi Jinsook) conducted the detention review hearing for approximately one hour and forty minutes starting at 4:10 p.m. that day.

Attending on behalf of the Special Prosecutor for Insurrection were Special Prosecutor Lee Yoonje and Chief Prosecutor Kook Won, while Lee Sangmin’s side was represented by attorney Lee Seungjik and others.

The special prosecutor’s team reportedly prepared an 85-slide presentation and submitted a 110-page written opinion to the court. The team is believed to have emphasized that the issuance of the arrest warrant already established probable cause for the charges and that there have been no significant changes in circumstances since the warrant was issued.

In contrast, Lee Sangmin is said to have argued that the charges have not been substantiated, and that there is no risk of evidence destruction or flight. Lee himself reportedly attended the hearing and expressed his position. After the hearing, when asked by reporters about the nature of his statements, Lee’s legal team replied, “It is the same as what has already been stated publicly.”

Previously, the Special Prosecutor for Insurrection (led by Special Prosecutor Cho Eunseok) secured Lee’s custody in connection with suspicions of abetting martial law. On August 1, Judge Jeong Jaewook, who is in charge of warrants at the Seoul Central District Court, issued an arrest warrant for Lee on charges of engaging in important duties related to insurrection, abuse of authority, and perjury, citing concerns about the destruction of evidence.

Lee Sangmin, as the Minister of the Interior and Safety?the ministry responsible for martial law during peacetime?is accused of failing to prevent and abetting the illegal declaration of martial law. He is also suspected of engaging in acts that disrupted the constitutional order by conveying instructions to the National Police Agency and the National Fire Agency to cut off power and water to media companies, thereby infringing on press freedom and the rights to life and safety of the people. Through these actions, he is alleged to have participated sequentially in former President Yoon’s insurrection crimes.

Lee is also accused of giving false testimony before the Constitutional Court. During the impeachment trial of former President Yoon in February, he testified that he had never attempted to cut off electricity or water, nor had he received any such instructions from the president. The special prosecutor’s team considers all of this testimony to be false.

The court is expected to decide on Lee’s release as early as today, taking into account whether the requirements for detention are met and the risk of evidence destruction. According to the Criminal Procedure Rules, the decision must be made within 24 hours after the conclusion of the hearing.

At a regular briefing that day, Special Prosecutor Park Jiyoung stated, “We requested an extension of Lee’s detention period on August 7,” and added, “Although the detention period has already been extended until August 19, we anticipate that the filing of the detention review may further extend the final expiration date.” She continued, “Since the arrest warrant was issued, only one round of questioning has taken place, and there are additional matters that need to be confirmed. If the detention period is extended, we plan to summon Lee for further questioning after that.”