“Justice Served,” Claims South Korea’s Yoon Upon Prison Release
President Yoon Suk Yeol walked out of prison on March 8, 2025, marking a defining moment in South Korea’s impeachment crisis. He became the first sitting president in the nation’s history to face arrest. The president spent 52 days behind bars before his release to face trial without detention on rebellion charges. These charges stemmed from his six-hour martial law declaration in December 2024. The country’s deep political divide became evident as more than 50,000 of Yoon’s supporters took to Seoul’s streets. Recent Gallup polls showed that 60% of South Koreans supported his removal from office. The president now faces potential life imprisonment if convicted, while the Constitutional Court prepares to deliver its significant verdict on his impeachment case.
Court Cancels Yoon’s Arrest Warrant Over Legal Technicalities
The Seoul Central District Court reversed President Yoon Suk Yeol’s detention order. The court cited critical procedural violations in how prosecutors handled the case. A three-judge panel, led by Judge Ji Gui-yeon, found that prosecutors had exceeded the legal detention period before they filed formal charges.
Prosecutors Face Criticism for Investigation Methods
The prosecution’s investigation drew heavy criticism over jurisdictional conflicts and procedural irregularities. The Corruption Investigation Office for High-ranking Officials (CIO) started the probe and later handed the case to prosecutors. The court raised serious concerns about the CIO’s authority to break down treason charges.
Overlapping jurisdictions among law enforcement agencies made the investigation more complex. The police turned down prosecutors’ suggestion to create a joint investigative team. They claimed their rightful jurisdiction over insurrection charges based on a 2021 agreement. The CIO’s role also sparked debate since the martial law declaration could implicate both police leadership and Justice Minister.
Defense Team Successfully Challenges Detention Validity
Yoon’s legal team proved effective in challenging his detention. They argued that prosecutors filed the indictment after the legal custody period had expired. The court agreed and ruled that authorities should calculate the detention period in hours instead of days. This ruling meant Yoon’s legal detention period ended at 9:07 a.m. on January 26. Prosecutors didn’t file charges until 6:52 p.m. that same day.
Attorney Yoon Gap-geun led the defense team in questioning the investigation’s basic legitimacy. The team argued that the CIO had no proper authority to investigate the president. They also criticized prosecutors for moving forward despite unclear jurisdiction.
The Supreme Prosecutors’ Office decided against appealing the court’s decision. Some members of the special investigation team disagreed internally. This decision matched a 2012 Constitutional Court ruling that declared immediate appeals against detention suspension decisions unconstitutional.
The court’s ruling pointed out two major flaws: wrong calculation of the detention period and doubts about the CIO’s legal authority to investigate treason charges. Legal experts say these procedural problems could affect future court proceedings if they remain unsolved. While Yoon can now leave custody, he still faces criminal charges.
Supporters Rally Behind South Korea’s Acting President
Tens of thousands of people flooded Seoul streets to express their views on President Yoon Suk Yeol’s impeachment. The crowd swelled to 110,000 people at two major rallies in the Gwanghwamun area and Yeouido district.
50,000 Citizens March Through Seoul Streets
Conservative activist pastor Jeon Kwang-hoon and the Christian group Save Korea led the demonstrations near Gwanghwamun area and Yeouido in western Seoul. The crowd grew steadily throughout the afternoon while 6,400 officers and 230 police busses maintained order.
The ruling People Power Party’s lawmakers joined the Yeouido rally where Rep. Yoon Sang-hyun spoke on the impeached president’s behalf. The opposition Democratic Party of Korea hosted a counter-rally near Anguk Station that drew 13,000 participants just a kilometer away.
Pro-Yoon Groups Launch Hunger Strike Campaign
Liberty Korea Veterans protested outside Gangnam Station and just needed the president’s immediate release. Popular Korean history instructor Jeon Han-gil spoke to 10,000 citizens at the national prayer meeting in Busan. The event’s organizers claimed 3 million attendees, though police counted only 38,000 people.
US and Korean Flags Wave at Freedom Plaza
Demonstrators waved both South Korean Taegukgi and American Stars and Stripes flags at the rallies. The American flag represents more than an alliance to Yoon’s conservative base – it symbolizes anti-communism and shared ideological values.
Protesters carried signs against Yoon’s impeachment in Korean and English, including messages that read “Stop the Steal”. A Korea Research poll showed 65% of Yoon’s conservative People Power Party supporters think last year’s parliamentary elections were compromised, despite no evidence of fraud.
Evangelical Protestant churches’ growing influence became clear during these demonstrations. These churches serve as Yoon’s support base. Pastor Jeon Gwang-hoon’s influential Sarang Jeil church hosts regular rallies in Gwanghwamun Square. Their gatherings feature English translation and international livestreams to connect with American audiences.
Constitutional Court Weighs Historic Impeachment Decision
South Korea’s Constitutional Court will soon announce its verdict on President Yoon Suk Yeol’s impeachment after eleven hearings that lasted 73 days. Eight justices under Justice Jeong Hyeong-sik’s leadership have made this case their “top priority”.
Judges Get Into Martial Law Declaration Evidence
The Constitutional Court spent time to assess the legitimacy of Yoon’s December martial law declaration. The court accepted vital evidence during the January 16 hearing that included surveillance footage from the National Assembly, National Election Commission, and the National Assembly speaker’s official residence.
Yoon stated that he did not send special forces soldiers to the legislature to disable the National Assembly or stop it from blocking his martial law. His defense team explained the decree wanted to raise an alarm about alleged abuses by the opposition Democratic Party.
Military commanders gave different testimony. They said Yoon and his aides ordered arrests of legislators who had political conflicts with the president. The prosecution team called Yoon’s statements “largely contradictory, irrational and unclear”.
Legal Experts Consider Possible Outcomes
Constitutional scholars expect a unanimous decision to uphold the impeachment because of substantial evidence showing constitutional violations. The court’s decision will show if Yoon stays in office or faces removal, which could lead to a new presidential election within 60 days.
Legal experts point out that impeachment trials are different from criminal cases. They need only a “high degree of probability” instead of proof “beyond reasonable doubt”. The court knows how to assess testimonies with an integrated approach, even with conflicting accounts.
The Constitutional Court must give its decision by mid-March, following earlier presidential impeachment cases. The court is deciding whether to show its final verdict live, similar to previous presidential impeachment decisions. This ruling will shape South Korea’s democratic future as the country’s third presidential impeachment trial.
Opposition Demands Swift Action Against Yoon
The Democratic Party stepped up its fight against Yoon Suk Yeol with a complete impeachment motion. The motion accused the president of “gravely and extensively violating the constitution and the law”. The party controls 170 seats in the 300-member parliament and needs support from at least eight ruling party lawmakers to reach the two-thirds majority for impeachment.
Democratic Party Questions Prosecutor’s Motives
Opposition leaders created a strategy to break down the circumstances behind the martial law declaration. They pushed for a special counsel to learn about possible treason allegations. Their focus was on what they called a “scheme” between the prosecution service and military.
The Democratic Party used its parliamentary majority to punish the government. They made deep cuts to the 2025 budget, specifically reducing funds for prosecutors’ classified operations. Park Chan-dae, who leads the Democratic Party, called Yoon’s actions treason.
Legal experts voiced deep concerns about the president’s motives. A former prosecutor who knew Yoon’s career challenged his election fraud claims. The prosecutor pointed out that normal investigative channels through the prosecution service were still open. According to the source, Yoon might have declared martial law to protect himself and his wife from criminal investigations while trying to control legislative and election bodies.
The opposition’s probe centers on Minister Kim Yong-hyun and Interior Minister Lee Sang-min, who were the core team behind the martial law declaration. Yeo In-hyung, who previously led defense counter-intelligence command, confirmed that Minister Kim gave military mobilization orders and wrote the martial law decree.
The Democratic Party rejected Yoon’s claim that martial law was just a warning against the opposition’s alleged “takeover” of the National Assembly. They found evidence that a secret organization had prepared martial law troops before the declaration. The party stressed that the martial law decree illegally limited parliamentary activities and that no part of the constitution gives the president this power.
South Korea faces its most important constitutional crisis. Legal technicalities led to President Yoon’s release, but this hasn’t calmed the political turmoil in the country. The streets of Seoul continue to fill with massive demonstrations that show a deep divide in society, as both supporters and opponents make their voices heard.
The Constitutional Court’s upcoming verdict will significantly impact South Korea’s democratic future. Yoon believes his release proves his innocence. However, he could face life in prison if found guilty of rebellion charges. The Democratic Party continues to push the impeachment forward through parliamentary action.
This political crisis has ended up becoming a test of South Korea’s democratic institutions and constitutional framework. The final outcome will alter the map of the nation’s politics. It will create vital precedents about presidential accountability and power balance between government branches. The Constitutional Court must decide by mid-March whether South Korea needs another presidential election or continues with Yoon’s controversial leadership.
