[Anchor]
President Yoon's side reiterated in the second response submitted to the Constitutional Court that the emergency martial law was justified and not an insurrection.
However, a significant portion of the content in the response differs from the indictments and statements of the military leadership that have already been arrested and charged, which seems to only fuel controversy.
This is a report by reporter Choi Yoo-kyung.
[Report]
In the second response, President Yoon's side used the term 'peaceful emergency martial law'.
They stated that the military's breaking of the National Assembly's windows and entering was solely to prevent safety accidents or bloodshed caused by excited crowds.
Regarding Proclamation No. 1, which prohibited activities in the National Assembly, they claimed it was not intended to block lawmakers from entering the National Assembly.
However, the indictment against former Defense Minister Kim Yong-hyun differs.
It contains details that President Yoon ordered to break into the National Assembly with guns and axes, if necessary, and to drag out all the lawmakers.
It was also stated that he ordered the arrest of lawmakers attempting to enter the National Assembly for violating the proclamation.
President Yoon's side also claimed that Proclamation No. 1 was poorly copied from proclamations during the previous military regime by former Minister Kim, stating that "the expression was immature".
However, it has been confirmed that among the ten or so martial laws declared since the establishment of the government, there has been no proclamation that prohibited the activities of the 'National Assembly, parliament, or political parties'.
While the October 1972 Yushin Proclamation and the May 1980 New Military Proclamation mentioned 'political activities', they only prohibited gatherings and demonstrations, not the activities of the National Assembly.
[Lee Ha-sang/Former Defense Minister Kim Yong-hyun's lawyer: "It seems that they view it as linked to forces involved in fraudulent elections and that those forces have seized and paralyzed the National Assembly through political activities. So their intent was to prohibit their political activities."]
The side of former Minister Kim also presented a completely opposite stance, stating that President Yoon directly reviewed the proclamation.
This is KBS News, Choi Yoo-kyung.
President Yoon's side reiterated in the second response submitted to the Constitutional Court that the emergency martial law was justified and not an insurrection.
However, a significant portion of the content in the response differs from the indictments and statements of the military leadership that have already been arrested and charged, which seems to only fuel controversy.
This is a report by reporter Choi Yoo-kyung.
[Report]
In the second response, President Yoon's side used the term 'peaceful emergency martial law'.
They stated that the military's breaking of the National Assembly's windows and entering was solely to prevent safety accidents or bloodshed caused by excited crowds.
Regarding Proclamation No. 1, which prohibited activities in the National Assembly, they claimed it was not intended to block lawmakers from entering the National Assembly.
However, the indictment against former Defense Minister Kim Yong-hyun differs.
It contains details that President Yoon ordered to break into the National Assembly with guns and axes, if necessary, and to drag out all the lawmakers.
It was also stated that he ordered the arrest of lawmakers attempting to enter the National Assembly for violating the proclamation.
President Yoon's side also claimed that Proclamation No. 1 was poorly copied from proclamations during the previous military regime by former Minister Kim, stating that "the expression was immature".
However, it has been confirmed that among the ten or so martial laws declared since the establishment of the government, there has been no proclamation that prohibited the activities of the 'National Assembly, parliament, or political parties'.
While the October 1972 Yushin Proclamation and the May 1980 New Military Proclamation mentioned 'political activities', they only prohibited gatherings and demonstrations, not the activities of the National Assembly.
[Lee Ha-sang/Former Defense Minister Kim Yong-hyun's lawyer: "It seems that they view it as linked to forces involved in fraudulent elections and that those forces have seized and paralyzed the National Assembly through political activities. So their intent was to prohibit their political activities."]
The side of former Minister Kim also presented a completely opposite stance, stating that President Yoon directly reviewed the proclamation.
This is KBS News, Choi Yoo-kyung.
■ 제보하기
▷ 카카오톡 : 'KBS제보' 검색, 채널 추가
▷ 전화 : 02-781-1234, 4444
▷ 이메일 : kbs1234@kbs.co.kr
▷ 유튜브, 네이버, 카카오에서도 KBS뉴스를 구독해주세요!
- Yoon's second statement to court
-
- 입력 2025-01-17 00:29:00

[Anchor]
President Yoon's side reiterated in the second response submitted to the Constitutional Court that the emergency martial law was justified and not an insurrection.
However, a significant portion of the content in the response differs from the indictments and statements of the military leadership that have already been arrested and charged, which seems to only fuel controversy.
This is a report by reporter Choi Yoo-kyung.
[Report]
In the second response, President Yoon's side used the term 'peaceful emergency martial law'.
They stated that the military's breaking of the National Assembly's windows and entering was solely to prevent safety accidents or bloodshed caused by excited crowds.
Regarding Proclamation No. 1, which prohibited activities in the National Assembly, they claimed it was not intended to block lawmakers from entering the National Assembly.
However, the indictment against former Defense Minister Kim Yong-hyun differs.
It contains details that President Yoon ordered to break into the National Assembly with guns and axes, if necessary, and to drag out all the lawmakers.
It was also stated that he ordered the arrest of lawmakers attempting to enter the National Assembly for violating the proclamation.
President Yoon's side also claimed that Proclamation No. 1 was poorly copied from proclamations during the previous military regime by former Minister Kim, stating that "the expression was immature".
However, it has been confirmed that among the ten or so martial laws declared since the establishment of the government, there has been no proclamation that prohibited the activities of the 'National Assembly, parliament, or political parties'.
While the October 1972 Yushin Proclamation and the May 1980 New Military Proclamation mentioned 'political activities', they only prohibited gatherings and demonstrations, not the activities of the National Assembly.
[Lee Ha-sang/Former Defense Minister Kim Yong-hyun's lawyer: "It seems that they view it as linked to forces involved in fraudulent elections and that those forces have seized and paralyzed the National Assembly through political activities. So their intent was to prohibit their political activities."]
The side of former Minister Kim also presented a completely opposite stance, stating that President Yoon directly reviewed the proclamation.
This is KBS News, Choi Yoo-kyung.
President Yoon's side reiterated in the second response submitted to the Constitutional Court that the emergency martial law was justified and not an insurrection.
However, a significant portion of the content in the response differs from the indictments and statements of the military leadership that have already been arrested and charged, which seems to only fuel controversy.
This is a report by reporter Choi Yoo-kyung.
[Report]
In the second response, President Yoon's side used the term 'peaceful emergency martial law'.
They stated that the military's breaking of the National Assembly's windows and entering was solely to prevent safety accidents or bloodshed caused by excited crowds.
Regarding Proclamation No. 1, which prohibited activities in the National Assembly, they claimed it was not intended to block lawmakers from entering the National Assembly.
However, the indictment against former Defense Minister Kim Yong-hyun differs.
It contains details that President Yoon ordered to break into the National Assembly with guns and axes, if necessary, and to drag out all the lawmakers.
It was also stated that he ordered the arrest of lawmakers attempting to enter the National Assembly for violating the proclamation.
President Yoon's side also claimed that Proclamation No. 1 was poorly copied from proclamations during the previous military regime by former Minister Kim, stating that "the expression was immature".
However, it has been confirmed that among the ten or so martial laws declared since the establishment of the government, there has been no proclamation that prohibited the activities of the 'National Assembly, parliament, or political parties'.
While the October 1972 Yushin Proclamation and the May 1980 New Military Proclamation mentioned 'political activities', they only prohibited gatherings and demonstrations, not the activities of the National Assembly.
[Lee Ha-sang/Former Defense Minister Kim Yong-hyun's lawyer: "It seems that they view it as linked to forces involved in fraudulent elections and that those forces have seized and paralyzed the National Assembly through political activities. So their intent was to prohibit their political activities."]
The side of former Minister Kim also presented a completely opposite stance, stating that President Yoon directly reviewed the proclamation.
This is KBS News, Choi Yoo-kyung.
-
-
최유경 기자 60@kbs.co.kr
최유경 기자의 기사 모음
-
이 기사가 좋으셨다면
-
좋아요
0
-
응원해요
0
-
후속 원해요
0
이 기사에 대한 의견을 남겨주세요.