During former President Yoon Suk-yeol’s trial on charges of insurrection, Judge Ji Guyun for the first time calculated the detention period based on “hours” rather than “days,” as had been the standard practice. Using this new method, the judge ruled that Yoon’s detention period had been exceeded and canceled his detention.
This unprecedented approach has been criticized within the legal community as an illegal decision.
Additionally, during subsequent trials after Yoon’s impeachment, Judge Ji directly asked him, “Are you a former president?” instead of following the customary practice where defendants state their occupations themselves. Yoon responded by merely nodding without speaking.
In contrast, former presidents such as Park Geun-hye and Lee Myung-bak had explicitly stated “unemployed” when asked, making Yoon’s case highly unusual.
At the first trial hearing, the court prohibited media outlets from filming inside the courtroom, preventing Yoon’s appearance from being made public.
This decision sparked controversy, as filming had been permitted during trials of previous former presidents like Park Geun-hye and Lee Myung-bak.
The court explained that “the filming request was submitted too late to seek the defendant’s opinion.”
Even before the trial began, Yoon was granted the privilege of using an underground passage to enter the courtroom, unlike ordinary defendants a move that has been criticized as preferential treatment.
Some trial procedures were also conducted behind closed doors, raising concerns about infringing upon the public’s right to know.
These rulings and the handling of the trial have been strongly criticized by South Korea’s political circles, legal community, and media, citing violations of fairness, impartiality, and neutrality, as well as undermining trust in the judiciary.
