Yoon: No plan to enforce martial law
입력 2025.01.22 (00:09)
읽어주기 기능은 크롬기반의
브라우저에서만 사용하실 수 있습니다.
[Anchor]
From now on, we will take a closer look at the issues discussed in today's (1.21) impeachment trial.
First, the court focused on whether President Yoon had the intention to paralyze the National Assembly.
President Yoon's side stated that they did not intend to actually prohibit the activities of the National Assembly through the martial law proclamation.
Reporter Choi Yoo-kyung has the details.
[Report]
The martial law proclamation No. 1 prohibited all political activities, including those of the National Assembly, local councils, and political parties.
President Yoon's side argued that this proclamation was merely formal and that there was no intention to dissolve the National Assembly or prohibit legislative activities.
[Cha Gi-hwan/President Yoon's attorney: "The proclamation was to formalize the martial law, and there was no intention to enforce it, and it could not be enforced due to potential conflicts with higher laws."]
They also maintained the claim that former Defense Minister Kim Yong-hyun copied the contents of the martial law from the previous military regime, but former Minister Kim himself stated that the President reviewed it directly.
[Lee Ha-sang/Former Minister Kim Yong-hyun's attorney/Jan. 16: "Since it contained provisions on the prohibition of political activities, it seems there was no misunderstanding regarding that point."]
President Yoon also denied allegations regarding a note suggesting the establishment of an 'emergency legislative body' to replace the National Assembly, mentioning former Minister Kim.
[Moon Hyung-bae/Acting Chief Justice of the Constitutional Court: "Did you give a note to the Minister of Economy and Finance to prepare a budget related to the national emergency legislative body?"]
[Yoon Suk Yeol/President: "The only person who could create this is the Minister of Defense, but at that time, the Minister of Defense was detained, so I couldn't confirm it specifically."]
Whether the proclamation aimed to paralyze the functions of the National Assembly is a key issue to determine its constitutionality, and both sides are expected to fiercely contest this in future hearings.
[Noh Hee-beom/Lawyer/Former Constitutional Court Rapporteur Judge: "To paralyze the powers of the National Assembly and destroy the constitutional order cannot be justified by any excuse. That is why Acting Chief Justice Moon Hyung-bae asked that first...."]
At the request of President Yoon's side, former Minister Kim will appear as a witness at the impeachment trial hearing scheduled for the day after tomorrow (1.23).
This is KBS News, Choi Yoo-kyung.
From now on, we will take a closer look at the issues discussed in today's (1.21) impeachment trial.
First, the court focused on whether President Yoon had the intention to paralyze the National Assembly.
President Yoon's side stated that they did not intend to actually prohibit the activities of the National Assembly through the martial law proclamation.
Reporter Choi Yoo-kyung has the details.
[Report]
The martial law proclamation No. 1 prohibited all political activities, including those of the National Assembly, local councils, and political parties.
President Yoon's side argued that this proclamation was merely formal and that there was no intention to dissolve the National Assembly or prohibit legislative activities.
[Cha Gi-hwan/President Yoon's attorney: "The proclamation was to formalize the martial law, and there was no intention to enforce it, and it could not be enforced due to potential conflicts with higher laws."]
They also maintained the claim that former Defense Minister Kim Yong-hyun copied the contents of the martial law from the previous military regime, but former Minister Kim himself stated that the President reviewed it directly.
[Lee Ha-sang/Former Minister Kim Yong-hyun's attorney/Jan. 16: "Since it contained provisions on the prohibition of political activities, it seems there was no misunderstanding regarding that point."]
President Yoon also denied allegations regarding a note suggesting the establishment of an 'emergency legislative body' to replace the National Assembly, mentioning former Minister Kim.
[Moon Hyung-bae/Acting Chief Justice of the Constitutional Court: "Did you give a note to the Minister of Economy and Finance to prepare a budget related to the national emergency legislative body?"]
[Yoon Suk Yeol/President: "The only person who could create this is the Minister of Defense, but at that time, the Minister of Defense was detained, so I couldn't confirm it specifically."]
Whether the proclamation aimed to paralyze the functions of the National Assembly is a key issue to determine its constitutionality, and both sides are expected to fiercely contest this in future hearings.
[Noh Hee-beom/Lawyer/Former Constitutional Court Rapporteur Judge: "To paralyze the powers of the National Assembly and destroy the constitutional order cannot be justified by any excuse. That is why Acting Chief Justice Moon Hyung-bae asked that first...."]
At the request of President Yoon's side, former Minister Kim will appear as a witness at the impeachment trial hearing scheduled for the day after tomorrow (1.23).
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: No plan to enforce martial law
-
- 입력 2025-01-22 00:09:42

[Anchor]
From now on, we will take a closer look at the issues discussed in today's (1.21) impeachment trial.
First, the court focused on whether President Yoon had the intention to paralyze the National Assembly.
President Yoon's side stated that they did not intend to actually prohibit the activities of the National Assembly through the martial law proclamation.
Reporter Choi Yoo-kyung has the details.
[Report]
The martial law proclamation No. 1 prohibited all political activities, including those of the National Assembly, local councils, and political parties.
President Yoon's side argued that this proclamation was merely formal and that there was no intention to dissolve the National Assembly or prohibit legislative activities.
[Cha Gi-hwan/President Yoon's attorney: "The proclamation was to formalize the martial law, and there was no intention to enforce it, and it could not be enforced due to potential conflicts with higher laws."]
They also maintained the claim that former Defense Minister Kim Yong-hyun copied the contents of the martial law from the previous military regime, but former Minister Kim himself stated that the President reviewed it directly.
[Lee Ha-sang/Former Minister Kim Yong-hyun's attorney/Jan. 16: "Since it contained provisions on the prohibition of political activities, it seems there was no misunderstanding regarding that point."]
President Yoon also denied allegations regarding a note suggesting the establishment of an 'emergency legislative body' to replace the National Assembly, mentioning former Minister Kim.
[Moon Hyung-bae/Acting Chief Justice of the Constitutional Court: "Did you give a note to the Minister of Economy and Finance to prepare a budget related to the national emergency legislative body?"]
[Yoon Suk Yeol/President: "The only person who could create this is the Minister of Defense, but at that time, the Minister of Defense was detained, so I couldn't confirm it specifically."]
Whether the proclamation aimed to paralyze the functions of the National Assembly is a key issue to determine its constitutionality, and both sides are expected to fiercely contest this in future hearings.
[Noh Hee-beom/Lawyer/Former Constitutional Court Rapporteur Judge: "To paralyze the powers of the National Assembly and destroy the constitutional order cannot be justified by any excuse. That is why Acting Chief Justice Moon Hyung-bae asked that first...."]
At the request of President Yoon's side, former Minister Kim will appear as a witness at the impeachment trial hearing scheduled for the day after tomorrow (1.23).
This is KBS News, Choi Yoo-kyung.
From now on, we will take a closer look at the issues discussed in today's (1.21) impeachment trial.
First, the court focused on whether President Yoon had the intention to paralyze the National Assembly.
President Yoon's side stated that they did not intend to actually prohibit the activities of the National Assembly through the martial law proclamation.
Reporter Choi Yoo-kyung has the details.
[Report]
The martial law proclamation No. 1 prohibited all political activities, including those of the National Assembly, local councils, and political parties.
President Yoon's side argued that this proclamation was merely formal and that there was no intention to dissolve the National Assembly or prohibit legislative activities.
[Cha Gi-hwan/President Yoon's attorney: "The proclamation was to formalize the martial law, and there was no intention to enforce it, and it could not be enforced due to potential conflicts with higher laws."]
They also maintained the claim that former Defense Minister Kim Yong-hyun copied the contents of the martial law from the previous military regime, but former Minister Kim himself stated that the President reviewed it directly.
[Lee Ha-sang/Former Minister Kim Yong-hyun's attorney/Jan. 16: "Since it contained provisions on the prohibition of political activities, it seems there was no misunderstanding regarding that point."]
President Yoon also denied allegations regarding a note suggesting the establishment of an 'emergency legislative body' to replace the National Assembly, mentioning former Minister Kim.
[Moon Hyung-bae/Acting Chief Justice of the Constitutional Court: "Did you give a note to the Minister of Economy and Finance to prepare a budget related to the national emergency legislative body?"]
[Yoon Suk Yeol/President: "The only person who could create this is the Minister of Defense, but at that time, the Minister of Defense was detained, so I couldn't confirm it specifically."]
Whether the proclamation aimed to paralyze the functions of the National Assembly is a key issue to determine its constitutionality, and both sides are expected to fiercely contest this in future hearings.
[Noh Hee-beom/Lawyer/Former Constitutional Court Rapporteur Judge: "To paralyze the powers of the National Assembly and destroy the constitutional order cannot be justified by any excuse. That is why Acting Chief Justice Moon Hyung-bae asked that first...."]
At the request of President Yoon's side, former Minister Kim will appear as a witness at the impeachment trial hearing scheduled for the day after tomorrow (1.23).
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.