SEOUL — A South Korean court has sentenced former prime minister Han Duck-soo to 23 years in prison for his role in the short-lived declaration of martial law on 3 December 2024, in the first criminal ruling to characterise the episode as an insurrection.
The Seoul Central District Court found that Han, 76, performed “an essential task” in carrying out the insurrection by helping create the outward appearance of lawful Cabinet procedure before the decree was announced by then president Yoon Suk Yeol. Presiding judge Lee Jin-gwan ordered Han to be taken into custody immediately after sentencing, citing concern that evidence could be destroyed.
In court, Judge Lee said Han had been “indirectly given democratic legitimacy” as prime minister and therefore carried a duty to uphold the constitution and laws. The judge concluded that Han “turned a blind eye” and participated as a member of what the court called the “December 3 insurrection”, describing the conduct as a “top-down insurrection”.
Han was convicted of engaging in a key action of insurrection, as well as perjury and falsifying an official document. The 23-year term exceeded the 15-year sentence sought by prosecutors, in an outcome that South Korean media described as unusual in first-instance proceedings. Han told the court he would “humbly” follow the judge’s decision, while his lawyer indicated an appeal would be pursued.
The court’s findings centre on the steps taken around the Cabinet meeting convened shortly before the martial law announcement. According to the judgment as reported by local outlets, the court held that Han failed to take sufficient steps to prevent the declaration and instead became involved in procedures intended to make the action appear legal. The court said the declaration was issued “with the purpose of undermining the constitutional order” and therefore met the threshold for insurrection.
Among the allegations upheld were that Han consented to measures affecting the media. The court said he agreed to steps such as cutting electricity and water supplies to outlets regarded as critical of the administration, and that this formed part of his operational role in the insurrection. Han has denied wrongdoing, maintaining he neither supported nor assisted the imposition of martial law and had no advance knowledge of Yoon’s plans beyond the announcement itself.
The case stems from the events of the night of 3 December 2024, when Yoon declared martial law in a late-night televised address and security forces moved towards the National Assembly. Lawmakers assembled despite police cordons and voted to reject military rule; the president subsequently lifted the decree within hours. Reuters, in a detailed reconstruction at the time, reported that the order triggered political turmoil and that ministers and party figures were divided, while opposition lawmakers moved rapidly to force a parliamentary vote.
Wednesday’s sentencing is the first court ruling against a senior Cabinet figure directly tied to the martial law order, and it is being watched for its implications for related prosecutions. Legal experts have treated the Han trial as a bellwether for other cases arising from the same episode.
Attention now turns to Yoon’s own criminal exposure. Yoon faces multiple trials and received a five-year prison sentence last week on charges linked to obstructing attempts to arrest him following the martial law declaration; he has appealed. A separate verdict on the most serious charge — alleged masterminding of an insurrection — is scheduled for 19 February 2026, with prosecutors seeking the death penalty, though South Korea has not carried out an execution since 1997.
Han’s conviction also reopens scrutiny of the political chain of events after the martial law crisis. Reuters described Han as a long-serving technocrat who held senior posts under five presidents and briefly became acting president after Yoon was impeached, before Han himself was impeached on accusations connected to the martial law declaration. The Constitutional Court later overturned Han’s impeachment, restoring his powers, after which he resigned and attempted an unsuccessful run in a snap election.
The court’s conclusion that the 3 December 2024 declaration constituted insurrection sets a legal marker for subsequent trials. While Han’s conviction can still be tested on appeal, the judgment provides the clearest judicial statement to date on how prosecutors’ core theory — that the decree and related actions amounted to an effort to subvert constitutional order — is likely to be assessed in South Korea’s criminal courts.
