It was reported on the 17th that former President Yoon Suk-yeol submitted a statement indicating that he would not respond to the police's third summons notification requiring him to appear for questioning on the 19th.
The police special investigation team stated that they had received the statement from former President Yoon and the opinion submitted by his legal counsel. The police also said they would review the contents of the statement and opinion and wait until the 19th.
Yoon's attorney, Yoon Gap-geun, reportedly included in the statement that, similar to the opinion submitted during the first and second summons requests, 'there are no elements to establish a crime under legal principles, and the president did not involve or instruct anything.' However, it was also reported that he expressed willingness to cooperate with a written investigation or an in-person investigation conducted at a third location.
Former President Yoon is facing allegations of obstruction of special public duty for directing the Presidential Security Service to prevent his arrest and of abuse of authority under the Presidential Security Service Act for instructing the Security Service to delete information related to military commanders' emergency options on December 7 last year.
To investigate these allegations, the police requested that former President Yoon appear on June 5 last month, but Yoon's side did not comply. The police then issued a second summons notification on the 12th, but he also submitted an opinion regarding non-appearance and did not appear before the police.
When a suspect does not respond to three consecutive summons notifications, investigative agencies typically seek to secure the suspect's presence through an arrest warrant. The mention of a written investigation or a third location by Yoon's side in the third summons non-appearance opinion is interpreted as an attempt to show a cooperative stance in the investigation while avoiding an arrest warrant by refusing to appear before the police.