The court began its final hearing at around 9:20 a.m. Friday to hear the special counsel’s sentencing request for Yoon, who is charged with leading an insurrection, as well as seven of his closest aides, who are charged with participating in the alleged insurrection.
The hearing began about 40 minutes earlier than usual amid expectations that proceedings would be prolonged. The process included examining additional evidence, hearing closing arguments, and the sentencing request.
Former defense minister‘s attorneys steal spolight
The court began examining additional evidence submitted by both the defense and the special counsel.
Taking into account the importance of the case and the defendants’ right to a full defense, the bench allowed arguments through an unlimited review of documentary evidence — a process involving the examination of each piece of submitted evidence in open court.
In typical court hearings, judges read through the list of evidence and briefly explain its nature. However, since the special counsel had spent about seven and a half hours reviewing documentary evidence in earlier hearings, the court gave it more time, saying it aimed to ensure equal defense rights for the defendants.
The examination of evidence began with a verbal altercation between former Defense Minister Kim Yong-hyun’s lawyers and the special counsel.
Kim’s attorneys said they had not prepared enough copies of an evidence document and requested permission to present an oral plea. The special counsel countered that other defendants who were ready should proceed first, leading to a heated exchange.
Judge Ji eventually intervened, telling the lawyers they should ask politely instead of “whining.”
The hearing resumed when copies of the document arrived, and Kim’s lawyers then stretched their statement to a total of eight hours. During this time, Yoon was seen closing his eyes and nodding off. Much of the statement was unrelated to the charges against Kim, prompting some media outlets to label it a “courtroom filibuster.”
At one point, a lawyer took issue with prosecutors’ alleged misuse of honorifics when referring to Yoon.
“The young prosecutors who called (Yoon) Yoon Suk Yeol without honorifics eventually acted as if they yielded after numerous complaints,” Kim’s lawyer said.
Judge postpones hearing
Yoon’s other aides used only about an hour during the evidence examination, while Yoon’s own lawyers were unable to begin theirs.
The hearing continued for almost fifteen hours, only stopping for lunch and dinner breaks, as well as a couple of short fifteen-minute recesses.
At around 5:45 p.m., Judge Ji showed flexibility when he said, “I won‘t say anything if you step out for a bit for some fresh air.”
In Korea, it is customary for the suspect and attorneys to remain seated throughout the hearing, except during official recesses.
At around 9:30 p.m., Yoon’s attorneys asked the court to postpone the hearing, arguing that “the most important argument cannot be made at dawn.”
Judge Ji agreed.
“I don’t think it can be called a proper argument if it is made at dawn,” the judge said at around 10 p.m. “We will designate an additional hearing on Jan. 13 to hear former President Yoon’s sentencing request and final argument.”
All eight defendants agreed. The judge emphasized that Tuesday’s hearing would be the last, with no further extensions.
The hearing ended shortly after midnight.
What the postponement means for ruling timeline
The special counsel’s sentencing request for Yoon is expected to be revealed Tuesday afternoon.
All defendants except Yoon have completed their evidence examinations. However, Tuesday’s hearing is also expected to stretch into the afternoon, as Yoon’s lawyers have said their evidence examination and closing argument could take up to six hours.
The delay has raised concerns that Yoon’s sentencing could also be postponed, though legal experts say this is unlikely.
Legal circles had initially forecast a ruling on Yoon’s insurrection charge in early to mid-February. South Korean courts undergo their annual personnel reshuffles in March, leading many to expect the verdict to be delivered before then.
The special counsel has said it deliberated between seeking the death penalty and life imprisonment for the former president, with those favoring life imprisonment slightly outnumbering proponents of the death penalty.
Meanwhile, a separate ruling on Yoon’s obstruction of arrest charge is scheduled for Friday. The special counsel has previously sought a 10-year prison sentence.