Former Prime Minister Han Duck-soo said at the first trial on charges of being an accomplice to insurrection on the 30th, "From the perspective of developing the nation, martial law is something that is hard to accept."
The Criminal Agreement Division 33 of the Seoul Central District Court (presiding judge Lee Jin-gwan, chief judge) held the first hearing for the former prime minister, who was indicted without detention on charges including aiding the leader of insurrection, for about an hour starting at 10 a.m. that day.
The former prime minister appeared in court that day wearing a navy suit. The former prime minister stood for identification and stated name, date of birth, and address. When the judge asked about occupation, the answer was, "Unemployed." To the question of whether a jury trial was desired, the response was, "I do not want it."
The court asked the former prime minister that day, "Do you think the Dec. 3 emergency martial law is constitutional, or do you think it is unconstitutional?"
In response, the former prime minister said, "During nearly 40 years as a public official, I have held the conviction that Korea must advance in terms of the market economy and international credibility," adding, "When viewed from the perspective of developing the nation, martial law is a situation that is hard to accept."
Earlier, on Aug. 29, the special counsel for the insurrection case indicted the former prime minister without detention on six charges, including aiding the leader of insurrection, falsifying official documents and using falsified official documents, damaging public records, violating the Presidential Records Management Act, and perjury.
After the special counsel stated the indictment that day, the former prime minister's attorney said, "We acknowledge only part of the perjury-related allegations, and deny all other indictment facts including aiding the leader of insurrection."
The attorney said, "There are three parts indicted as perjury," adding, "No memory of seeing or receiving the presidential office's martial-law documents on the day martial law was declared, never received any special documents, and did not see documents being handed over; among these, we acknowledge only the first, and the rest mean the defendant does not remember accurately."
The attorney also said, "Our view is that the aiding-the-leader-of-insurrection charge lacks concrete facts or such intent." He added, "We also take the position that the charges of falsifying official documents and using falsified official documents, and violating the Presidential Records Management Act due to the disposal of materials such as the emergency-martial-law proclamation, do not hold legally."
The court set the next hearing for Oct. 13 at 10 a.m.
Meanwhile, earlier the court allowed live coverage of the trial that day at the special counsel's request. After the hearing ends, the video is expected to be released online following a de-identification process to mask personal information.