President Yoon Suk-yeol is giving an emergency national address at the Yongsan Presidential Office in Seoul on the night of December 3, 2024. [Photo=Office of the President]

Your Honor, esteemed presiding judge and fellow judges,

I deeply thank you for your diligent and fair judicial proceedings over the past nearly year, guiding this trial with wisdom.

For a mere few hours of martial law, an investigation was launched as if it were a rebellion, with all domestic investigative agencies mobilizing. Subsequently, a special prosecution team was formed to conduct further investigations. Numerous public officials who were faithful to their duties were arbitrarily booked and detained if they did not provide the desired testimonies, and unreasonable indictments were issued indiscriminately.

I wonder if such an event has ever occurred in the history of modern civilized nations. Nevertheless, I pay my respects to the court's efforts in leading this trial with adherence to law and principles amidst a frenzy of "purges and oppression."

"Have you ever seen a rebellion with an unloaded gun?"

One broadcaster asked, "Have you ever seen a rebellion that was announced nationwide and worldwide via broadcast, and then halted by the National Assembly after just two or three hours?" "Have you ever seen a rebellion with an unloaded gun?" I believe these words symbolically represent the illusion of the tempest that has swept this nation for the past year.

The indictment in this case is nothing more than a delusion and a novel, divorced from objective facts. Having been involved in investigations and trials for the past 26 years, this is the first time I have witnessed multiple agencies pursuing investigations in such a chaotic and irrational manner, without any coherent command structure.

Without a proper command structure, they have been engaging in fabrication and distortion rather than investigation, all with the singular goal of labeling it a rebellion, without any sound judgment. It feels like a pack of wolves, blindly chasing and tearing at the sound of the whistle from the Democratic Party, which holds an absolute majority in the National Assembly, in league with the dark forces that have long controlled this country.

It was on the night of December 3, 2024, around 10:30 PM, that I declared the emergency martial law, which has become the prey of these "rebellion-mongering" wolves.

Anti-national forces, forces seeking to subvert the system, and forces infringing on our sovereignty from abroad, in collusion with the overwhelmingly dominant opposition Democratic Party, manipulated public opinion through false propaganda and sowed discord between the government and the people. They engaged in anti-constitutional legislative dictatorship, collapsed the constitutional order, paralyzed governance, and pushed the nation to the brink of ruin.

As President, entrusted with the grave responsibility of ensuring the independence of the Republic of Korea, the continuity of the state, and the protection of the Constitution, I declared martial law to inform the sovereign people of this national emergency and to call upon them to join me in overcoming it.

This was because there was no other recourse when the nation was in crisis due to the anti-constitutional dictatorship of the National Assembly, other than to awaken the sovereign people.

It was a plea for the sovereign to directly engage, to take interest in politics and governance, and to vigilantly monitor and check the nation-destroying excesses of representative power.

Some of the minimal troop presence deployed to secure the National Assembly were unarmed and simply sat below the assembly walls. Others, armed only with unloaded weapons, were surrounded by thousands of civilians in the assembly courtyard and assaulted. No one was oppressed, and no one obstructed the National Assembly's agenda for passing the resolution to lift martial law.

Need for Inspection Felt Due to Election Commission's Refusal of Verification

Ninety-two members of the Special Warfare Command and fifteen members of the Capital Defense Command entered the National Assembly premises around midnight. However, a massive crowd had already entered, and the military presence was so small that they could not even properly maintain order.

Additional troops arrived near the National Assembly later, but as soon as the resolution to lift martial law was passed, all troops were immediately withdrawn.

I entered the National Election Commission to conduct a security inspection of the election management system, as per the authority granted by Article 7 of the Martial Law Act concerning the oversight of administrative and judicial affairs. However, due to time and preparation constraints, I was unable to do anything and merely took photographs of the server equipment before leaving.

This was because, in past election lawsuits, a large number of forged ballots had been discovered, and a security inspection of the National Election Commission's computer system by the National Intelligence Service just one year prior revealed a serious situation where it was extremely deficient by national agency standards and vulnerable to external hacking.

The election system is a core institution that shapes the governance order of a modern representative democracy. The management of elections in a liberal democracy must be guaranteed in terms of transparency and fairness.

Nevertheless, as the National Election Commission was refusing transparent and fair verification, I decided to conduct an inspection, considering the importance of election management and public interest.

Did they disrupt the constitutional order?

Did they incite a riot?

A Two-Hour Martial Law Could Not Be Sedition

From the declaration to the lifting of martial law, it took six hours. The delay was solely due to the time taken to convene the State Council for lifting martial law in the early morning. In reality, immediately after the National Assembly passed the resolution to lift martial law within two hours of its declaration, the troops were withdrawn, bringing the martial law situation to an end. Furthermore, I issued a national address to announce the lifting of martial law while the State Council was being convened.

Initially, the public was bewildered as to why the President had declared martial law. However, soon after, many citizens understood the urgent circumstances that led to the declaration. When I was impeached and faced impeachment proceedings, over half of the public opposed my impeachment.

This was because they empathized with the reasons and inevitability of declaring martial law. I believe that many citizens still empathize with the reasons why I sounded the emergency alarm by declaring martial law.

Many citizens still believe that the December 3rd emergency martial law was not a military-administrative dictatorship suppressing the people, as seen during the authoritarian regimes of the past, but rather an effort to protect the people's freedom and sovereignty and to save the nation and its constitutional order.

I am aware that particularly the youth and students, who represent future generations, recognize the reasons for martial law and the precarious state of the nation, and are seriously contemplating their roles and actions.

Even the Constitutional Court, which decided to impeach me, stated, "It appears that the President, as the head of the executive branch and the head of state, felt a profound sense of responsibility to somehow overcome the paralysis of governance and the severe detriment to national interests caused by the opposition party's tyranny. It can be understood that the declaration of martial law and the subsequent measures were based on this perception and sense of responsibility held by the President as the chief executive."

Regardless of whether one supports or opposes emergency martial law, everyone accurately understands the purpose of my declaration of martial law. It had absolutely nothing to do with the intent of inciting rebellion or disrupting the constitutional order.

North Korea's Directive: "Shake and Paralyze the Yoon Suk-yeol Government"

Forces aiming to subvert the system and anti-national forces began protests calling for the pre-emptive impeachment of the President-elect immediately after the presidential election in March 2022, even before he took office. This was a rejection of the election results. A total of 178 resignation and impeachment protests continued incessantly until the declaration of emergency martial law on December 3rd.

Figures from the major opposition Democratic Party also took the stage at these rallies. It was not merely a few anti-government protests but an organized campaign for resignation and impeachment, linked to established political structures.

Investigations by the National Intelligence Service into various spy rings have confirmed that agents were receiving directives to shake and paralyze the Yoon Suk-yeol government, which is loyal to liberal democracy and the ROK-U.S. alliance, by any means necessary.

They have continuously divided national opinion by disseminating and sharing North Korean directives. The Democratic Party, in league with these elements, abused their legislative powers, impeached public officials en masse, engaged in legislative and budgetary outrages, and schemed to paralyze governance.

It is widely known that they obstructed legislation necessary for the elected government to carry out its national agenda, rendering it unable to function. Numerous unprecedented events have occurred in our constitutional and parliamentary history.

The opposition party, in collusion with forces seeking to subvert the system and anti-national forces, abused its constitutional powers in the National Assembly to render the government a "lame duck" government, thereby undermining the constitutional order of liberal democracy and market economy, the ROK-U.S. alliance—the cornerstone of our security and economy—and security cooperation with the U.S. and Japan to counter North Korea's nuclear threat. They sought to overturn our constitutional order and collapse solidarity with free world nations.

In particular, they persistently obstructed efforts to strengthen the ROK-U.S. alliance as a nuclear-based strategy and to jointly respond to missile threats through naval and air force cooperation between the ROK and the U.S. and Japan. What is this but the act of anti-national forces, engaging in treasonous incitement and continuous damage to core national interests? Are they patriotic forces?

A government diligently pursuing liberal democracy has been prevented from doing anything, with legislation concerning the economy and people's livelihoods being rejected, leading to the proliferation of unconstitutional laws and the trampling of security and the economy. They repeatedly introduced laws that harmed core national interests, provoking presidential vetoes and causing national division.

They have built up towards subversion of the system by pushing for the abolition of the National Intelligence Service's counter-espionage investigation authority and the National Security Act. They have also opposed amendments to espionage laws amidst the serious reality of state secrets and advanced industrial technologies being continuously leaked to China. They prevented even minimal reciprocal responses to China's Anti-Espionage Law.

The expansion of defense industry technology and industrial infrastructure, and the expansion of the defense market and alliances with defense cooperation countries are crucial for national security. The National Assembly, dominated by the opposition party, has pursued legislation requiring parliamentary consent for defense exports, thereby undermining security cooperation with free world nations and jeopardizing defense technology security by obstructing defense exports opposed by North Korea, China, and Russia.

The excesses of the opposition party regarding core security budgets are even more astonishing. They have drastically cut budgets for surveillance and reconnaissance assets and missile defense and interception systems, essential for rapidly responding to North Korea's nuclear and missile attacks, making project implementation impossible.

A decisive response to North Korea's nuclear and missile threats is crucial not only for security but also for reducing national risk, thereby attracting investment and vitalizing the economy.

The poor treatment of non-commissioned officers and junior officers, who form the backbone of military personnel, has led to significant attrition. They have also blocked budgets for improving treatment aimed at retaining these professional personnel for long-term service. The allocated budgets were not a significant burden on taxpayers.

Regarding policing budgets, a representative example is the reduction of personnel costs and the abolition of special activity funds to obstruct drug investigations. During the Democratic Party administration, the drug investigation agencies were unified under the police, abolishing the experienced and skilled prosecution's drug investigation unit, and now they have even cut the police's investigation budget.

Drugs not only harm future generations but also the forces that control the drug market eventually gain control of all criminal organizations and exert immense influence over a nation's politics and society.

Despite knowing how crucial national response to drug warfare is in today's immoral hybrid warfare and non-combat tactics that spare no means, they are deliberately ignoring it.

It is difficult to understand why the Democratic Party is so passive and hesitant in responding to drugs. Which country's party is this, and which country's National Assembly is this?

Along with the abolition of prosecutorial investigative authority and operational funds, corruption and large-scale financial fraud cases have been entirely handed over to agencies lacking expertise.

However, in order to suppress political opponents and opposing forces, they have established colossal special prosecution teams that handle both investigation and prosecution, pouring hundreds of billions of won of taxpayer money, conducting "rabbit-hunt" style investigations, indicting with fabricated narratives, and focusing on public opinion manipulation.

Wasting 100 Billion Won of Taxpayer Money on Special Prosecutions

During the Yoon Suk-yeol administration, 22 motions for the impeachment of public officials were filed, some of whom resigned, while others were impeached and suspended from duty. Impeachment trials typically take 6 to 9 months, and sometimes over a year.

To prevent prolonged suspension of duties and paralysis of governance, even if they resign, the selection of successors, vetting, and confirmation hearings all require extensive procedures and time.

Even after taking office, it takes time to understand the job and gain control of the organization. It also takes time for the staff of the relevant agency to adapt to the new head's work policies and to adjust to them.

In the over 70 years of our constitutional history, there have been almost no impeachment filings or indictments of public officials. In the Yoon Suk-yeol administration alone, there were 22 cases before the emergency martial law, and 30 cases until my impeachment decision. They even impeached the Prime Minister after impeaching the President, and attempted to impeach the Deputy Prime Minister.

Is this truly an exercise of the impeachment power? Does the Constitution permit such legislative and budgetary excesses and the impeachment of innocent public officials at will simply because one holds a majority in the National Assembly?

This is a clear abuse of constitutional authority and directly violates the spirit and intent of the Constitution.

Why do you think they are so persistently engaged in this anti-constitutional legislative dictatorship? Is it not to overturn the constitutional trajectory of the nation, which should be based on liberal democracy, a free market economy, and solidarity with the free world? Are they not aiming for regime change?

I was appalled to see them pursue the impeachment of the Chairman of the Board of Audit and Inspection and the Chief Prosecutor of the Seoul Central District Prosecutors' Office.

The Chairman of the Board of Audit and Inspection is an audit expert appointed by the Democratic Party administration and is not a political figure. At that time, a unprecedented case of hiring irregularities by the Election Commission had surfaced.

It was alleged that approximately 1,000 people were illegally hired, as if it were a family business. The Board of Audit and Inspection conducted an audit after preliminary investigations by the Anti-Corruption and Civil Rights Commission. Furthermore, they conducted an audit of national security officials who leaked state secrets related to the THAAD deployment during the Democratic Party administration and referred the case to the prosecution for investigation.

However, the Democratic Party obstructed the work of the Board of Audit and Inspection through the impeachment of its chairman for these audits, which were absolutely necessary and lawful.

Given these circumstances, it was impossible not to see this as an overt demonstration of collusion between the Election Commission and the Democratic Party, and organized protection of espionage and treasonous acts involving the leakage of state secrets.

Impeaching the Chairman of the Board of Audit and Inspection, a constitutional officer, is tantamount to attempting to overthrow the constitutional system.

If the Chairman of the Board of Audit and Inspection, who audits all public officials nationwide, subordinate agencies, state-owned enterprises, the Financial Services Commission, the Fair Trade Commission, and the Financial Supervisory Service, were to be impeached and suspended from duty without any corruption that would warrant dismissal, what would become of national administration and public discipline? This is an unprecedented event not only in our constitutional history but also in world constitutional history.

"Frenzied Knife Dance" Using Impeachment Authority

The Seoul Central District Prosecutors' Office is a key investigative and judicial agency handling over 50% of important cases, including corruption and economic crimes. Seeing them pursue impeachment to pressure and line up prosecutors investigating their own corruption, I thought, "Now, if they don't like a verdict, they'll impeach the judge too."

They are using their impeachment authority in a "frenzied knife dance" and ultimately intend to dismantle the constitutional order. Our Constitution certainly does not permit such a National Assembly or such parliamentary behavior.

I had exercised patience until I saw the Democratic Party push for the impeachment of the Chairman of the Board of Audit and Inspection and the Chief Prosecutor of the Seoul Central District Prosecutors' Office. However, at that point, I felt compelled to sound the emergency alarm to the sovereign people against the nation-destroying dictatorship of the National Assembly.

I determined that the situation, where the constitutional order based on liberal democracy and republicanism was collapsing and the normal functioning of national capabilities—including diplomacy, security, economy, future investment, public discipline, law enforcement, and investigations—was severely jeopardized, was the most critical national emergency since the non-wartime martial law declared in our country in the past.

However, as the cause of this national emergency was the National Assembly dominated by the opposition party, I believed there was no other way but to appeal to and awaken the sovereign people to the excesses and dictatorship of representative power.

Around the end of November 2024, I summoned then-Minister of National Defense Kim Yong-hyun to the Hannam-dong official residence. While discussing the impeachment of the Chairman of the Board of Audit and Inspection, I explained that the opposition party's abuse of its constitutional powers was destroying the constitutional order, paralyzing governance, and leading the nation to the brink of ruin.

I stated that the crisis was more severe than situations such as the June 3rd incident in 1964 opposing the Japan-ROK talks, the October 17, 1972 Special Declaration due to U.S.-China détente and the withdrawal of U.S. troops, and the sudden death of the President on October 26, 1979, all of which led to non-wartime martial law declarations.

I also explained that although the opposition party was destroying the constitutional order through the abuse of its constitutional powers, I intended to exercise the President's constitutional emergency powers within the framework of the Constitution and to appeal to the sovereign people to awaken and arouse them, thereby restoring the collapsed constitutional order and paralyzed governance.

I instructed Minister Kim Yong-hyun to review and report on the declaration of a state of national emergency, which is equivalent to the declaration of martial law under the Constitution.

"This Martial Law Will End Quickly, Unlike Past Instances"

I clarified a few points. First, I emphasized that this martial law would be different from past martial law declarations. Given the situation where the opposition party holds a majority in the legislature, I anticipated that the National Assembly would pass a resolution to lift martial law within a short period, possibly within half a day, or at most a day.

Second, I announced that I would issue a national address on martial law declaration via live broadcast. The troops deployed would consist of two companies, approximately 250-280 personnel, divided into two teams. One team would maintain order amidst the crowd gathering at the National Assembly, while the other team would be dispatched to a few locations of the Election Commission's computer systems to conduct security inspections and verify if issues such as network segmentation, firewalls, and password problems, previously pointed out by the National Intelligence Service a year ago, had been rectified.

Meanwhile, regarding the deployed troops, I instructed that live ammunition be prohibited and that experienced non-commissioned officers or above be assigned to ensure safety. They were to depart from their respective units after the President's national address announcing the declaration of martial law.

I also directed that the troops deployed to the National Assembly, whose mission was to ensure security and order, should not disrupt the entry and work of National Assembly members and staff.

At the time, the National Assembly was in session, with thousands of people present. I wondered if 250-280 personnel could maintain order. However, I decided to maintain a small deployment size, considering that a larger deployment could create anxiety and increase the risk of safety incidents.

Furthermore, as security is paramount in the declaration of martial law, I instructed Minister Kim Yong-hyun to review and prepare it alone. I believed that Minister Kim, having served as Deputy Chief and Chief of Staff at the Joint Chiefs of Staff in the past, would be well-versed in Joint Chiefs of Staff martial law procedures and manuals.

The actual national address announcing the declaration of martial law took place from 22:23 to 22:30 on December 3rd. The martial law was effective from 23:00, and the military arrived at the National Assembly around midnight.

The deployed troops consisted of 92 members of the Special Warfare Command and 40 members of the Capital Defense Command. 77 members of the Special Warfare Command were positioned in the National Assembly courtyard, and the remaining 15 were in the main building. 15 members of the Capital Defense Command, completely unarmed, having even put down their weapons, entered the National Assembly premises and sat by Gate 7, awaiting orders.

Additional troops who were subsequently deployed arrived behind the National Assembly main building around 01:03 on December 4th, the time the resolution to lift martial law was passed. However, they were immediately withdrawn after the passage of the resolution.

The 77 members of the Special Warfare Command in the National Assembly courtyard, adhering to the directive to avoid clashes with civilians, struggled to maintain their position, enduring assaults from civilians, and were unable to effectively maintain order. Immediately after the resolution to lift martial law was passed, they politely bowed to the civilians and withdrew.

The 15 members who entered the National Assembly main building were busy evading fire extinguishers sprayed by National Assembly staff. The Capital Defense Command troops had no contact whatsoever with civilians.

Deliberately Deployed Small Troop Numbers to Reduce Public Anxiety

Shortly after midnight on December 4th, Minister Kim Yong-hyun suggested that it would be good to also visit Yeolwonsa and the Democratic Party headquarters in connection with the Election Commission. I instructed him that visiting private institutions was absolutely out of the question and that no additional troops should be deployed. Minister Kim Yong-hyun immediately complied with my instructions.

Minister Kim Yong-hyun reported on the preparations he was making at the presidential residence between late November and December 2nd. The national address draft he prepared required almost no revisions. As for the proclamation, I believed it would not be enforced since martial law was expected to be lifted quickly, and also it would be invalid if it contradicted superior law, so there was no need for special attention.

Convening the State Council before declaring martial law would have exposed the declaration during the regular weekly meeting, potentially causing unnecessary confusion.

In such a situation, a larger troop deployment might have become necessary. To minimize troop deployment, I decided to maintain maximum security and, before declaring martial law, to convene key ministers related to martial law—the Prime Minister, Ministers of Foreign Affairs, National Defense, Unification, the Interior and Safety, and Justice—along with a few additional ministers as security guests at the Presidential Office to meet the quorum.

The exercise of national emergency powers, such as the declaration of emergency martial law, is a constitutional authority that the President exercises exclusively and unilaterally. The determination of whether the substantive and procedural requirements for its exercise are met is also exclusively vested in the President. It is subject only to the National Assembly's political and ex-post facto control through its resolution to lift martial law.

There is no precedent in the constitutional history of any nation worldwide for a president to stand trial in a criminal court for exercising national emergency powers. Of course, this is separate from discussions about proportionality and responsibility for individual actions that may arise if a bloody incident occurs after the declaration of martial law.

The forces propagating the "rebellion narrative" have spread propaganda claiming I ordered the expulsion of National Assembly members from the plenary hall or the arrest of politicians. However, their falsehoods were all exposed as fabrications when the encrypted phone call records were revealed.

If tens of thousands of troops were mobilized for martial law as in the past, then such claims might be considered. But what could be achieved with such minimal troops for maintaining order? Such nonsensical lies are utterly illogical. It is fundamentally impossible.

I made it clear to Minister Kim Yong-hyun that if the motion to impeach the Chairman of the Board of Audit and Inspection, scheduled for Monday, December 2nd, were to be withdrawn, then the declaration of martial law would be nullified. I also stated that if the motion to impeach the Chairman of the Board of Audit and Inspection were filed on December 2nd, I would declare martial law on the following Tuesday, December 3rd.

My intention was for both the President and the National Assembly to exercise their respective constitutional powers openly, by declaring it during the parliamentary session in the middle of the week so that the National Assembly could immediately pass a resolution to lift martial law if it so chose.

Perhaps Commander Kim Yong-hyun informed the Commander of the Special Warfare Command, the Commander of the Capital Defense Command, and the Commander of the Counter-Espionage Command, who were to be dispatched to the National Election Commission, about the emergency martial law either just before or just after my national address announcing it. Consequently, the commanders could not give preparations or orders related to martial law to their subordinates beforehand.

The Counter-Espionage Command had its officers on vacation or off duty. They returned to their units after watching the martial law declaration broadcast on the news. Even after midnight, the return of officers to their units was not properly organized. The Capital Defense Command, consisting primarily of night duty personnel, was dispatched to the National Assembly with only the usual mission of guarding and protecting major public facilities, without specific mission orders.

The Special Warfare Command also experienced significant delays because the Capital Defense Command did not grant approval for the helicopter transport of the 707th Special Mission Battalion. There was absolutely no communication between the agencies beforehand.

The "rebellion-mongering" forces are calling a few-hour martial law, a national message-based martial law, a "personal coup." Have you ever seen a personal coup conducted in such a manner?

I do not know how a personal coup is conducted, nor have I ever considered it. But is it done by announcing it to the media via broadcast, without prior preparation, and with only a few night duty personnel? If it were a personal coup, why would one go to the National Election Commission? That could be done later after taking control of the situation, and if it were a personal coup, there would be no elections to conduct for some time.

While the public may not openly speak about it due to their daily lives, the public can make rational judgments. The public is by no means foolish.

No Plan to Deploy Police Even Considered

There was no plan to deploy the police for the December 3rd martial law from the outset. I assumed that, with the declaration of emergency martial law, a minimal military presence would naturally be deployed. At the time, I was not at all conscious of the approximately ten entrances to the National Assembly. Both Minister Kim Yong-hyun and I, having visited the National Assembly during our public service careers, assumed that only the entrances near the National Assembly Building and the main gate would be open at night.

Around the evening of the martial law declaration, Minister Kim Yong-hyun came to my office and said, "Since the number of troops being deployed is very small, it will be difficult to maintain order. It would be beneficial to receive police support for the outer perimeter of the National Assembly." I then arranged for him to speak with Commissioner General Cho Ji-ho of the National Police Agency by phone, but instead, they met for about 10-15 minutes at the Samcheong-dong private residence.

The blocking and subsequent opening, and then re-blocking of the National Assembly entrances after the declaration of martial law were independent decisions made by the police. They were in no way based on instructions from the President, the Minister of National Defense, or the Martial Law Commander. The entrances and walls of the National Assembly are quite low, making it easy to climb over, and thousands of people entered the assembly courtyard without significant obstruction.

After the declaration of martial law, I had my first call with Commissioner General Cho Ji-ho at around 23:15, which lasted approximately 55 seconds. I subsequently made four more calls at 23:20:36, 23:28:39, 23:30:17, and 23:34:41. Approximately 1 hour and 10 minutes later, I spoke with him again at 00:48:32, 01:08:58, and 01:10:58.

The 23:15 call was to inquire about the situation around the National Assembly. Commissioner General Cho Ji-ho reported, "The military has not yet arrived, and people are flooding in, so we have closed the National Assembly entrances for now. However, Seoul Metropolitan Police Commissioner Kim Bong-sik stated that legally, we must allow National Assembly members and staff to enter, so we are verifying their identities and letting them in." I responded, "Commissioner Kim Bong-sik is knowledgeable about the law as he is from the investigative field. Of course, that is the correct course of action. Well done."

The police actually began opening the National Assembly entrances and allowing National Assembly personnel to enter from 23:07. My subsequent four calls to Commissioner General Cho Ji-ho until 23:34, made in short intervals, were to ascertain the situation around the National Assembly and out of concern for safety incidents.

Even when I was a prosecutor or prosecutor general, I always personally oversaw on-site situations, such as searches and seizures in major cases. Therefore, I made calls to the Police Commissioner General and commanders to understand the situation and prevent safety accidents.

Commissioner General Cho Ji-ho testified that at 23:15, I ordered him to control the National Assembly, and in calls between 23:34 and earlier, I ordered him to arrest National Assembly members climbing over the wall. Both of these claims are baseless and false.

Commissioner General Cho Ji-ho testified early in the rebellion investigation in December 2024 that I had called him six times and that in all six calls, I had instructed him to "arrest all National Assembly members attempting to enter the National Assembly."

However, after the encrypted phone call records were revealed, he recently changed his testimony, claiming that in the five calls between 23:15 and 23:34, the latter calls were to arrest "members climbing over the wall."

In early December 2024 investigations, investigators who heard Commissioner General Cho Ji-ho's testimony that I had ordered him to "arrest all members attempting to enter the National Assembly" found it unconvincing, given the police personnel deployed at the time. The records show no further questioning or specific interrogation.

Even the prosecutor questioning Commissioner General Cho Ji-ho in this court in December 2025 expressed doubt, asking if it was true that the defendant had given such an order when that time was when National Assembly members and staff had free access to enter the National Assembly, thus having no need to climb over the wall.

After the resolution to lift martial law and after its lifting, I called Commissioner General Cho Ji-ho and told him, "You worked hard. You did well. The early actions of the police and allowing members to enter helped to lift martial law quickly." I also said, "I will call Commissioner Kim Bong-sik directly after he rests a bit."

According to the testimonies of Commissioner General Cho Ji-ho and Commissioner Kim Bong-sik at the Constitutional Court trial and in this courtroom, they both stated that they received such encouraging calls from me. The blocking of the National Assembly gates was a police decision made independently at 23:37, but in fact, they allowed National Assembly members and staff to enter until 24:00.

I was completely unaware that the National Assembly entrances were re-closed at 24:00. That is why I called Commander Lee Jin-woo of the Capital Defense Command at 00:32 (29 seconds), 00:34 (16 seconds), and 00:36 (25 seconds). In the second and third calls, I asked him to "find the entrances managed by the police" and to "go to the entrance near the National Assembly Building." Commander Lee Jin-woo also testified in this court in a manner consistent with this.

Commander Lee Jin-woo also testified in this court that upon arriving at the National Assembly after 24:00, he saw a huge number of people inside and that the police were supporting people climbing over the wall from behind.

Forced False Testimonies Through Arrests, Indictments, and Detentions

From the early stages of the rebellion investigation in December 2024, investigative agencies extracted numerous false testimonies from public officials by threatening them with arrest, indictment, and detention. For them, these were not just matters of personal liberty but critical issues related to their livelihood, including pensions.

As testified by Commander Lee Jin-woo, they presented fabricated news in the media and stated that others had made certain statements, thereby pressuring individuals to provide the desired testimonies.

The testimonies of Kwak Jong-geun, Hong Jang-won, and Prime Minister Han Duck-soo are cited as decisive evidence for the Constitutional Court's impeachment decision. Had the encrypted phone call records and CCTV footage been presented at the Constitutional Court's impeachment proceedings, the false testimonies would have been easily discerned, as they have been in this courtroom.

Investigative records that lacked evidentiary value under impeachment procedure laws were submitted without limitation to the Constitutional Court and used as evidence for factual determination. The logic was that impeachment is a form of administrative disciplinary action. However, in this courtroom, it has been revealed that most of the key evidence was false and fabricated.

It is truly regrettable that a president with the highest democratic legitimacy, directly elected by the entire populace, was tried and impeached in such a manner. It seems that the rebellion investigation launched immediately after the lifting of martial law was merely a means to bring down the President during the impeachment proceedings.

Upon the National Assembly's resolution to lift martial law, I immediately accepted it, withdrew the military, and while awaiting the convening of the State Council, summoned Minister Kim Yong-hyun and the Martial Law Commander to my office and instructed them to immediately terminate the military's martial law status.

Accordingly, Minister Kim Yong-hyun immediately convened a video conference of key military commanders nationwide to end the military's martial law status. Before the State Council members arrived, I delivered a national address announcing the lifting of martial law.

Despite this, the "rebellion-mongering" forces have not ceased their absurd and preposterous propaganda claiming I would declare martial law a second or third time.

Even after declaring martial law, I called Representative Choo Kyung-ho, the floor leader of the People Power Party, and said, "You have gone through so much hardship in inter-party relations. I apologize for not informing you in advance about the declaration of martial law. Our members have nothing to worry about. It will be over soon." Representative Choo Kyung-ho also testified that the President called him and said, "If the National Assembly passes a resolution to lift martial law according to the procedure, I will immediately accept it and lift it." This is also stated identically in the indictment against Representative Choo Kyung-ho.

Before declaring martial law, on December 2nd, I attended a public discussion on livelihoods in Gongju and visited Sanseong Market. On December 3rd, I participated in the official state visit events for the President of Kyrgyzstan. Over the weekend of November 30th and December 1st, I spent almost the entire day reviewing relevant materials and preparing.

My appearance at the official event just before the declaration of martial law was no different from any other occasion, and everyone saw that there was no sign of anxiety or tension. If I had been planning a personal coup, I would have postponed these events or chosen a different day for the declaration of martial law.

Furthermore, considering that the National Assembly was in session and it was a weekday, a plenary session could have been convened immediately. It is easy to see that there was absolutely no intention to neutralize or obstruct the National Assembly's plenary session.

The Commander of the Counter-Espionage Command was on vacation from December 1st to December 2nd. His unit members had also returned home and came back to the unit after midnight upon seeing the news. The Capital Defense Command had a dinner for its key executives and their spouses on the evening of the martial law declaration, and most of them had already left for the day, so personnel were assembled mainly from those on night duty. There was absolutely no prior preparation.

I prepared without tension, as it was a national appeal, a martial law based on a national message. It was not an extra-legal measure to completely change the political landscape, but rather a measure to inform and awaken the public to a national crisis of constitutional collapse and governance paralysis.

I felt relieved and safe after lifting martial law in the early morning of December 4th and returning to the residence, thinking that it had been successfully concluded without any safety incidents.

When the "rebellion-mongering" began, I initially thought it was just what these people always do, and I believed that things would change now that the public recognized the national crisis. As a legal professional myself, the accusation of rebellion struck me as so absurd and baffling.

The Nation's Situation Was More Dire Than I Imagined

When I heard that the Corruption Investigation Office for High-ranking Officials (CIO) had requested an arrest warrant from the Seoul Western District Court, I thought it was an exit strategy, as the CIO lacks jurisdiction over rebellion charges, and they would transfer the case to the police or prosecution if the warrant was rejected.

At the time, since rebellion was included as a ground for impeachment, I believed that if I explained it well during the impeachment proceedings and demonstrated the absence of any intent to disrupt the constitutional order or incite a riot, the investigation would naturally conclude.

Although there were political risks, seeing the rising public opinion against impeachment and the public's enlightenment and support, I felt that the emergency alarm I had sounded had had some effect.

Having conducted major investigations in the prosecution for 26 years, I always worked according to law and principle. I never dreamed that rebellion would be so meticulously planned and executed under the guise of an investigation, driven by political conspiracy.

Even when the CIO came to the presidential residence to arrest me on January 3, 2025, I thought they would stop there, as the presidential residence is a military facility zone where entry and search are prohibited. Then, on January 15th, seeing thousands of police officers storming in, I realized that the national crisis I had perceived was indeed far more severe.

The forces engaged in this "rebellion-mongering," conducting baseless investigations and violating laws and principles, mobilizing thousands of police officers to arrest the president, are people who would not hesitate to collapse the constitutional order and paralyze governance for the sake of gaining power.

It has been over a year since the emergency martial law of December 3rd was lifted within a few hours. However, the "rebellion-mongering" aimed at purging and suppressing political opponents and dissenting forces continues unabated. They remain indifferent to the critical national crisis, with warnings of severe economic hardship echoing, and fissures appearing in the solidarity of the free world.

However, the people and the youth understand that martial law has become a "enlightenment decree" and are proclaiming it as an unavoidable decision made in a time of national crisis.

I have consistently stated my position on the December 3rd emergency martial law on three occasions: in my address on December 12, 2024, prior to the impeachment motion; in my address on January 15, 2025, before the CIO's arrest attempt; and in my final statement at the Constitutional Court's impeachment trial on February 25, 2025.

Today's statement adds the realities confirmed through the subsequently revealed encrypted phone call records and courtroom testimonies. I urge you to carefully consider my December 12, 2024 address, January 15, 2025 address, and my February 25, 2025 Constitutional Court final statement, which have already been submitted as evidence, regarding the reasons why I diagnosed the situation as a national crisis and declared emergency martial law.

Military personnel and public officials who carried out their duties following the declaration of emergency martial law during a national crisis are suffering due to the "rebellion-mongering" narrative. Many citizens and young people who genuinely love their country and seek to defend freedom and justice are also enduring times of suffering and frustration. I cannot help but feel profound regret. All of this is due to my shortcomings.

The only thing I can do now is pray. I pray multiple times a day for the military officials and public servants enduring hardships, and for our honest and good citizens and youth. May God's grace and blessings be abundantly with them. And I believe that He will steadfastly protect this nation.

I implore you to consider the constitutional implications of this case and the grave responsibility I bore as President to prevent the collapse of the constitutional order and the paralysis of governance during a national crisis. It could never constitute disruption of the constitutional order. It could never be a rebellion.

I thank the court for its diligent proceedings amidst a demanding schedule. I also thank the citizens who have confirmed the truth of this case and offered their support through their attendance and broadcasts.

The exercise of a president's national emergency powers cannot constitute rebellion.

I request your wise judgment, your Honors.

Thank you.

Sincerely, Yoon Suk-yeol, January 13, 2026

Provided by the legal team of former President Yoon Suk-yeol