Top Headlines

Feeds

Yoon’s Lawyers Reject Perjury Allegations in First Cabinet Meeting Hearing

Updated (7 articles)

First Hearing Held on Jan 21 in Seoul Central District Court On 21 January 2026, Yoon Suk‑yeol’s legal team appeared for the inaugural hearing of the perjury case concerning a Cabinet meeting allegedly scheduled before martial law was declared, arguing the meeting was intended from the outset [1]. The defense emphasized that Yoon consistently maintained the session was necessary and would occur, countering prosecutors’ claim of deception. The court’s proceedings mark a new phase in scrutinizing Yoon’s actions during the December 2024 martial‑law episode.

Prosecutors Accuse Yoon of Misrepresenting Meeting Timing Prosecutors allege Yoon gave a false impression that the Cabinet meeting was planned prior to the imposition of martial law, linking the charge to his testimony in former prime minister Han Duck‑soo’s trial last November [1]. They argue the timing was deliberately misrepresented to legitimize the emergency measures. The indictment frames the alleged perjury as a pivotal element of the broader investigation into Yoon’s authority‑seeking maneuvers.

Defense Cites Pre‑planned Meeting and Defense Minister Advice Yoon’s lawyers contend that former Defense Minister Kim Yong‑hyun advised a Cabinet session was essential, and that Yoon was aware of the meeting’s necessity before receiving that recommendation [1]. They present this as evidence the gathering was part of a deliberate, pre‑existing plan rather than a post‑hoc fabrication. The argument seeks to demonstrate that Yoon’s statements were truthful reflections of an already scheduled event.

Perjury Case Connected to Ongoing Insurrection and Martial‑Law Prosecutions The perjury charge runs alongside insurrection and martial‑law accusations stemming from Yoon’s failed attempt to impose emergency rule in December 2024 [1]. Authorities have pursued multiple indictments to address the legality of actions taken during that period. The overlapping cases underscore the extensive legal exposure Yoon faces for the same series of events.

Legal Battle Expected to Focus on Intent and Timeline Both prosecution and defense are poised to contest the core issues of intent, timing, and the factual basis of Yoon’s statements throughout the trial [1]. Future hearings will likely dissect documentary evidence and witness testimony to determine whether the Cabinet meeting was genuinely pre‑planned. The outcome may influence the trajectory of related insurrection and martial‑law proceedings.

Sources

Timeline

May 2022 – Yoon Suk Yeol begins his presidency and repeatedly cites emergency powers, famously telling ruling‑party leaders at a November 2022 dinner that he would “wipe them all out” even if shot dead, signalling early intent to use extraordinary authority [4].

Oct 2023 – Yoon and close aides intensify planning for a martial‑law bid, debating whether to issue an emergency decree before or after a scheduled military reshuffle and positioning future top commanders to support the scheme [4][3].

April 2024 – General elections are held; Yoon’s team later seeks to label the results as fraudulent and prepares to arrest National Election Commission officials under a prospective martial‑law regime [3][4].

Dec 3, 2024 – Yoon declares martial law, aiming to halt National Assembly activity and seize legislative and judicial power; investigators say he picks this date to avoid U.S. interference during the U.S. government transition after Donald Trump’s election [3][4].

July 10, 2025 – Yoon is taken into custody, four months after his earlier release, as prosecutors continue the investigation into the December 2024 martial‑law attempt [6].

Sept 26, 2025 – The insurrection trial against Yoon opens at Seoul Central District Court, focusing on his December 2024 martial‑law declaration and related offenses [7].

Dec 4, 2025 – Special counsel adds a perjury indictment against Yoon, alleging he gave false testimony that a Cabinet meeting was pre‑planned; Yoon rejects the claim, stating “Cabinet members are not dolls who came to create an outward appearance” [7].

Dec 14, 2025 – Special counsel Cho Eun‑seok announces that Yoon began martial‑law preparations before October 2023, indicts 24 people—including Yoon, former Prime Minister Han Duck‑soo, former NIS director Cho Tae‑yong and former Defense Minister Kim Yong‑hyun—and details plans to use drones against North Korea and to fabricate election‑fraud accusations [3][4][5].

Dec 15, 2025 – Special prosecutor Cho Eun‑seok describes the December 2024 martial law as a “palace coup” intended to monopolize power, cites coercion of National Election Commission staff, and notes a forthcoming January ruling on Han Duck‑soo that will test the insurrection charge [2].

Jan 21, 2026 – Yoon’s lawyers appear at Seoul Central District Court for the first perjury hearing, denying the charge and arguing the Cabinet meeting was necessary and pre‑planned, while prosecutors maintain Yoon misrepresented its timing to influence Han’s trial [1].

January 2026 (future) – A first‑instance ruling on former Prime Minister Han Duck‑soo is scheduled, expected to decide whether the December 2024 martial‑law declaration meets the legal definition of insurrection, a decision that could shape Yoon’s broader prosecutions [2].

2026 (future, local elections) – Democratic Party leader Jung Chung‑rae announces a second comprehensive investigation into the martial‑law episode, signaling continued political contestation ahead of upcoming local elections [2].

All related articles (7 articles)