An appeals session was held on Wednesday at the Seoul High Court concerning former South Korean President Yoon Suk Yeol, who faces a five-year jail sentence issued by a lower court. The conviction includes charges of obstructing arrest linked to his attempt to impose martial law in December 2024.
During the opening hearing, Yoon attended in a dark navy suit, according to media accounts. Prosecutors, who had originally requested a 10-year prison term, told the appeals court that the five-year sentence was "far too lenient," asserting that Yoon had shown no remorse and had not offered an apology to the public.
Yoon's defence team countered that the five-year sentence already exceeded his culpable responsibility. They also argued that the arrest warrants issued against him were invalid from the beginning and urged the court to overturn the lower-court decision and enter an acquittal.
When given the opportunity to speak by the presiding judge, Yoon reiterated his denial of wrongdoing.
The appeals hearing takes place against the backdrop of a more severe verdict in a separate but related case. In that separate proceeding, a lower court sentenced the former president to life imprisonment after finding him guilty of leading an insurrection during the short-lived imposition of martial law.
Legal arguments at the appeals hearing focused on both procedure - including challenges to the validity of arrest warrants - and on assessments of appropriate punishment. Prosecutors maintained that the lower-court punishment did not reflect the seriousness of the conduct, while defence lawyers urged the appellate court to reverse the conviction on the grounds of excessive sentencing and procedural infirmities.
The appeals trial will determine whether the lower-court ruling in the obstruction case is upheld, modified, or overturned. The proceeding is distinct from the separate insurrection conviction that resulted in a life sentence at the lower court level; both legal matters, however, relate to Yoon's actions during the brief martial-law episode.
Further details on timing for subsequent hearings or rulings were not provided during the opening session.