The special counsel team investigating former President Yoon Suk-yeol's insurrection charges has appealed the first-instance verdict, arguing that the December 3 emergency martial law declaration "was not an impromptu measure but a premeditated act prepared meticulously over an extended period."
Special Counsel Cho Eun-seok's team filed the appeal on June 25 against the ruling on Yoon and seven other defendants facing charges including leading an insurrection. The prosecution released a statement on June 27 outlining its grounds for appeal.
The special counsel contended that the trial court applied an excessively narrow standard in determining whether defendants acted with the "purpose of disrupting constitutional order"—a key element required to establish insurrection charges. Prosecutors also argued that sentences were too lenient relative to the gravity of the offenses.
The court had ruled on June 19 that it was difficult to conclude Yoon discussed emergency martial law before October 2023, finding he made the decision just two days before the December 3 declaration.
The special counsel disputed this timeline, citing a notebook belonging to defendant Noh Sang-won, former head of the Defense Intelligence Command. "The notebook contains multiple entries detailing staged plans related to emergency martial law and subsequent measures," prosecutors stated.
"Considering entries about military commander appointments, upcoming National Assembly election schedules, and changes in a specific politician's status in December 2023, evidence proves Noh began writing the notebook before the October 2023 military commander reshuffle and completed it by December of that year at the latest," the prosecution argued.
"Even excluding Noh's notebook, when logic and common experience are applied to facts established by other objective evidence, it is readily apparent that former President Yoon and others declared emergency martial law with the intent to monopolize and maintain power," the statement added.
The special counsel also challenged the court's framework for assessing intent to disrupt constitutional order, which focused solely on whether defendants "intended to forcibly suppress the National Assembly using military forces."
"The declaration of emergency martial law alone—clearly unconstitutional and illegal for failing to meet requirements under the Constitution and Martial Law Act—forcibly and illegally transferred essential administrative and judicial functions to the military, causing these functions to be suspended, excluded, or eliminated," prosecutors argued. "The declaration of emergency martial law itself constitutes an act of disrupting constitutional order and establishes the crime of insurrection."
Regarding sentencing, the special counsel criticized the court for "mechanically considering sentencing factors as in ordinary criminal cases."
The court sentenced Yoon to life imprisonment on charges of leading an insurrection. Former Defense Minister Kim Yong-hyun received 30 years for performing key duties in the insurrection. Former Defense Intelligence Command head Noh Sang-won was sentenced to 18 years, former National Police Agency Commissioner Cho Ji-ho to 12 years, former Seoul Metropolitan Police Agency Commissioner Kim Bong-sik to 10 years, and former National Assembly Security Unit Commander Mok Hyun-tae to 3 years.
The special counsel specifically objected to the court citing "advanced age and first-time offender status" as mitigating factors for Yoon and others.
"In typical criminal trials, age is considered to calculate effective sentencing by comparing the prison term with the defendant's remaining life expectancy," prosecutors stated. "The mere fact that defendants were elderly at the time of the offense is not considered a favorable sentencing factor."
The special counsel emphasized it "will make every effort in the appellate trial to ensure defendants receive sentences commensurate with their culpability through active prosecution, including submitting substantial additional evidence beyond Noh's notebook to prove the timing and purpose of martial law preparations."