Han Duck-soo Sentenced to 23 Years Over Martial Law Insurrection

Published: 21 January 2026. The English Chronicle Desk. The English Chronicle Online.

South Korea’s former prime minister, Han Duck-soo, has been sentenced to 23 years in prison for his involvement in the martial law insurrection. The ruling confirms that Han actively participated in a 3 December 2024 self-coup attempt by former president Yoon Suk Yeol, which sought to declare martial law unconstitutionally. Legal experts note that the sentence is unusually severe, reflecting Han’s prominent role and responsibility as the nation’s prime minister. The court emphasized that Han knowingly created false cabinet records to legitimize an unconstitutional decree, making the insurrection appear formally sanctioned.

The presiding judge, Lee Jin-kwan, ordered Han’s immediate detention, stating that his actions violated the democratic framework and legal obligations inherent to his office. Prosecutors had initially sought a 15-year sentence, arguing that Han bore unique responsibility due to his constitutional authority to prevent the decree’s execution. However, the judge rejected prior military coup precedents, categorizing the event as a “self-coup” by elected officials that posed unprecedented threats to democratic stability. Han, 76, now faces imprisonment, though he retains the right to appeal the verdict, according to South Korean law.

The court highlighted evidence of Han’s direct involvement in obstructing proper cabinet deliberations. CCTV footage confirmed that Han was fully aware of the martial law plan hours before Yoon’s televised announcement and actively facilitated a cabinet meeting with only the minimum number of ministers needed for legal compliance. The trial revealed that Han guided officials to destroy backdated documents to conceal his signature, further establishing intent to obstruct justice. Judge Lee described this conduct as a deliberate betrayal of Han’s constitutional duties, noting his continued concealment of evidence and pattern of perjury throughout the proceedings.

Han’s defence claimed he privately opposed martial law and was psychologically shocked by the president’s actions. In court, he repeatedly asserted that he never supported the decree, yet the evidence portrayed a different narrative. Investigators noted his instructions to remove or falsify records, directly contradicting claims of opposition. The court also found Han guilty of multiple offenses, including document falsification, destruction of presidential records, and perjury connected to Yoon’s impeachment proceedings. Legal analysts suggest this case sets a historic precedent, underscoring accountability at the highest levels of government.

Prosecutors emphasized that Han’s long career as a diplomat, serving five consecutive administrations, only heightened his responsibility to uphold constitutional norms. Appointed prime minister in May 2022, he became the longest-serving prime minister under a single South Korean president. Despite this extensive political experience, the court concluded that Han prioritized loyalty over legal duty, enabling the attempted self-coup to proceed. The ruling contrasts sharply with that of Yoon, who remains free pending his own trial, in which prosecutors have demanded the death penalty. Han’s sentencing arrives just five days after Yoon received a separate five-year term for obstructing his own arrest, signaling intensified judicial scrutiny of the 2024 events.

The martial law insurrection trial has drawn international attention, as analysts compare it with historical constitutional crises in South Korea. Scholars point out that while military coups in the past relied on armed forces, this event uniquely involved elected officials attempting to leverage legal authority for personal gain. Observers argue that the ruling against Han sends a strong message regarding the responsibilities of high-ranking officials and the judiciary’s commitment to democratic principles. Human rights organisations have expressed cautious approval, noting that holding senior officials accountable is crucial for transparency and maintaining public trust.

Han’s conviction also raises questions about the broader impact on South Korean politics, particularly regarding cabinet accountability and executive oversight. Experts suggest that future administrations may face heightened scrutiny to prevent abuse of power, while legal reforms could reinforce mechanisms to block unconstitutional decrees. Meanwhile, public reaction in South Korea has been intense, with protests both supporting and opposing the ruling, reflecting deep societal divisions over the 2024 martial law crisis. Analysts warn that political stability may remain fragile until Yoon’s trial concludes in February, when prosecutors will argue for the death penalty for the former president.

The 23-year sentence against Han marks an unprecedented judicial intervention in South Korea’s modern democratic era. Legal commentators highlight that the decision underscores the judiciary’s ability to challenge even the most senior political figures. Observers note that Han’s actions, including falsifying records and aiding the self-coup, directly violated the democratic system he swore to protect. This case serves as a cautionary tale of constitutional accountability and may influence governance standards across East Asia.

As South Korea prepares for Yoon’s sentencing on 19 February, the country remains closely monitored by international media and human rights advocates. The Han Duck-soo trial illustrates the high stakes of political authority misuse, demonstrating that even long-serving, experienced officials cannot evade consequences for undermining democratic order. Legal analysts suggest that the verdict could become a benchmark in comparative studies of constitutional crises worldwide. The ruling reinforces the principle that elected leaders are bound to uphold, not subvert, the rule of law, regardless of rank or tenure.

The sentencing of former prime minister Han Duck-soo underscores the judiciary’s decisive role in defending democratic governance. By holding him accountable, South Korea sets a precedent for scrutinizing high-level complicity in unlawful political maneuvers. Citizens and global observers alike now await Yoon’s trial outcome, which could redefine political accountability standards in the region. The case also highlights the enduring importance of transparency, constitutional adherence, and legal vigilance in modern democracies, serving as a reminder that no official is above the law.

Check our latest news