South Korea’s Blue House Calls for Lawful Verdict After Death‑Penalty Demand in Yoon Insurrection Trial
Updated (3 articles)
Final Hearing Conducted on Jan 13, 2026 in Seoul The Seoul Central District Court held the insurrection trial’s final hearing on 13 January 2026, with former President Yoon Suk‑yeol in attendance [1][2][3]. The case stems from Yoon’s declaration of martial law on 3 December 2024, which prosecutors allege was intended to eradicate “anti‑state forces.” The hearing underscores the gravity of the charges, which accuse Yoon of attempting to overthrow the constitutional order [1][2].
Special Counsel Seeks Capital Punishment for Yoon During the same hearing, the special counsel team formally requested the death penalty, the most severe sanction available under Korean law [1][2][3]. Prosecutors argue that Yoon’s martial‑law actions constitute insurrection and merit the harshest accountability. The demand marks a rare push for capital punishment in a political case and signals prosecutors’ intent to pursue the maximum possible sentence [1][2].
Blue House Calls for Lawful Verdict Reflecting Public Sentiment The Blue House issued a statement urging the judiciary to render a verdict that complies with the law and meets public expectations [1][2][3]. Cheong Wa Dae framed the expected outcome as a product of due process rather than political pressure, emphasizing the need for public trust in the decision. The administration’s stance highlights the political sensitivity surrounding the trial and the potential impact of the ruling on national stability [1][2].
Democratic Party Labels Death‑Penalty Request Commonsense Democratic Party spokesperson described the prosecutors’ sentencing request as “commonsense,” insisting that no leniency should be shown to those who tried to destroy the constitutional order [1]. The DP argued that the law must hold the former president fully accountable for actions that threatened the people’s sovereignty. This partisan framing adds another layer to the public debate over appropriate punishment [1].
Sources
-
1.
Yonhap: Blue House Expects Lawful Verdict After Death‑Penalty Demand in Yoon Insurrection Trial: Highlights the Blue House’s expectation of a law‑based verdict, the DP’s “commonsense” framing, and the trial’s roots in the December 2024 martial‑law declaration .
-
2.
Yonhap: Blue House Expects Lawful Verdict After Death‑Penalty Demand in Yoon Insurrection Trial: Focuses on prosecutors’ push for the death penalty, the Blue House’s call for a verdict aligned with law and public sentiment, and details of the Jan 13 2026 hearing and Yoon’s presence .
-
3.
Yonhap: Blue House Urges Judiciary to Rule to Meet Public Expectations After Death Penalty Sought for Yoon: Stresses the Blue House’s appeal for a ruling that reflects public mood, the centrality of the death‑penalty request, and the timing of the report on 13 January 2026 .
Timeline
Dec 3, 2024 – Former President Yoon Suk Yeol declares martial law, stating the measure aims to “eradicate anti‑state forces” and preserve state security, a move that later underpins the insurrection charges against him [1][2].
Jan 13, 2026 – The final hearing of Yoon’s insurrection trial takes place at Seoul Central District Court, with the ousted president present, marking the culmination of a year‑long legal process following his martial‑law declaration [1][2][3].
Jan 13, 2026 – A special counsel team urges the court to impose the death penalty on Yoon, the harshest sanction sought in the case and a stark escalation of prosecutorial demands [1][2].
Jan 13, 2026 – The Blue House issues a media statement: “We expect the judiciary to deliver a verdict in accordance with the law and with public expectations,” emphasizing due process and public sentiment in the high‑profile trial [1][2][3].
Jan 13, 2026 – The ruling Democratic Party labels the death‑penalty request “commonsense,” asserting that “there should be no leniency in the ruling” to hold accountable those who attempted to overturn the constitutional order [1].
Jan 13, 2026 – Cheong Wa Dae urges the judiciary to render a decision that meets public expectations, highlighting the political sensitivity surrounding capital punishment in Korea [3].