South Korean prosecutors sought the death penalty for former President Yoon Suk Yeol during a marathon court hearing in Seoul that stretched past midnight, marking a dramatic escalation in the legal proceedings against the 65-year-old ousted leader charged with leading an insurrection.
The request came during a 17-hour closing hearing at the Seoul Central District Court that began Tuesday and continued into the early hours of Wednesday. Special counsel Cho Eun-suk’s team argued that Yoon’s actions posed a grave threat to South Korea’s constitutional order and warranted the maximum punishment allowed under law.
The former president faces insurrection charges stemming from his declaration of martial law in December 2024, an emergency decree that lasted only six hours before lawmakers voted it down. Yoon had sent soldiers to seize Parliament, but the attempted power grab quickly collapsed as legislators managed to convene and invalidate his order.
Upon hearing prosecutors request capital punishment, Yoon smiled from his position in the courtroom. The gallery erupted with reactions from his supporters as the special counsel outlined their reasoning for seeking the harshest available sentence.
Prosecutors argued that Yoon showed no remorse for his actions and continues to maintain that his controversial decree was justified. Throughout the legal proceedings, the former president has defended his decision as necessary to protect democracy rather than undermine it.
In his 90-minute final statement delivered shortly after midnight, Yoon pushed back forcefully against the charges. He maintained that his actions were intended to alert the public to what he viewed as growing threats from the opposition Democratic Party, which held a legislative majority that effectively blocked his political agenda.
The special counsel’s team also accused Yoon of attempting to incite conflict with North Korea, suggesting this was part of his strategy to justify the martial law declaration. This allegation adds another layer to the prosecution’s case that Yoon orchestrated what they describe as anti-state activities.
Yoon was impeached following his short-lived martial law decree and formally removed from office in April. Current President Lee Jae-myung, who leads the Democratic Party, approved independent probes in June into Yoon’s martial law gambit and other alleged criminal activities during his tenure.
The insurrection trial represents just one of eight separate criminal cases Yoon faces. Seven former military and police officials are being tried alongside him for their alleged roles in implementing the martial law order.
The death penalty request follows historical precedent in South Korean jurisprudence. Two former presidents, Chun Doo-hwan and Roh Tae-woo, were convicted of insurrection in the 1990s for their roles in a 1979 military coup and events in 1980. Prosecutors sought the death penalty for Chun at that time.
Chun was initially sentenced to death, though the sentence was later commuted to life imprisonment. Roh received a 17-year prison sentence. Both men were released after serving approximately two years following presidential pardons, which the government at the time described as necessary for national reconciliation.
Despite the dramatic nature of the prosecution’s request, legal experts widely believe Yoon is unlikely to face execution even if sentenced to death. South Korea has not carried out an execution in nearly 30 years, with the last execution taking place in December 1997.
The country has maintained a de facto moratorium on capital punishment for nearly three decades, though death sentences can still be handed down by courts. This extended period without executions has led human rights organizations to view South Korea as having effectively abolished the death penalty in practice if not in law.
Amnesty International criticized the prosecution’s decision to seek capital punishment. “No one is above the law, including a former president, but seeking the death penalty is a step backward,” said Chiara Sangiorgio of Amnesty International. “The death penalty is an inherently cruel, inhuman and irreversible punishment that has no place in a justice system that claims to respect human rights.”
Reaction to the death penalty request split along political lines. Democratic Party floor spokesperson Moon Geum-ju issued a statement supporting the prosecution’s position. “Calling for the death penalty for Yoon is not a matter of choice but a necessity and cannot be considered excessive,” Moon said, arguing that a lesser sentence would be an affront to justice.
Conservative lawmakers from the People Power Party took a markedly different approach, declining to issue an official statement on the case. Party leader Jang Dong-hyuk told reporters that the special prosecutor’s sentencing request was not an issue he should comment on, adding that he expects the court to conduct a fair trial.
The December 3, 2024, martial law declaration marked one of the most turbulent moments in South Korea’s recent democratic history. Yoon’s emergency decree, which restricted citizens’ political rights and mobilized military forces, lasted only six hours before collapsing in the face of parliamentary resistance and public opposition.
The swift rejection of martial law by lawmakers demonstrated the resilience of South Korea’s democratic institutions, but the episode nevertheless shook international confidence in the country’s political stability. South Korea’s status as a stable democracy and important U.S. ally made the constitutional crisis particularly significant for regional security dynamics.
Throughout the legal proceedings, Yoon has consistently defended his actions as an attempt to protect constitutional governance rather than subvert it. He has characterized investigations into his conduct as politically motivated, claiming they have been marked by manipulation and distortion.
The court is scheduled to deliver its final verdict on February 19. Legal observers expect the ruling to carry significant implications for South Korean democracy and the accountability of presidential power, regardless of whether capital punishment is ultimately imposed.
The marathon hearing that concluded in the early hours of Wednesday represented the culmination of months of legal proceedings that have captivated South Korea and raised fundamental questions about executive authority, democratic guardrails, and the appropriate response to alleged constitutional violations by a sitting president.
As South Korea awaits the February verdict, the case continues to expose deep political divisions within the country. The contrasting responses from progressive and conservative politicians reflect broader tensions about how to balance accountability for alleged wrongdoing with concerns about political prosecutions and national unity.
Sources:
https://abcnews.go.com/International/south-korean-prosecutors-seek-death-penalty-former-president/story?id=129195586
https://www.foxnews.com/world/south-korean-prosecutor-seeks-death-penalty-ex-president-yoon-over-martial-law-declaration-self-coup
https://time.com/7346064/south-korea-death-penalty-yoon-suk-yeol-insurrection-martial-law/
https://www.nknews.org/?p=966615
https://www.southcarolinapublicradio.org/2026-01-14/south-korean-prosecutors-seek-death-penalty-for-ex-president-yoon
https://www.amnesty.org/en/latest/news/2026/01/south-korea-death-penalty-call-for-ex-president-yoon-a-step-backward-for-human-rights/
