Former Prime Minister Han Myeong-sook will be jailed Monday, four days after the Supreme Court upheld a lower court’s ruling that sentenced her to two years in prison for taking illicit political funds from a local businessman. The prosecution has postponed the execution of the sentence to allow her to go through some medical checkups and settle her affairs.

The delay seems to have further exacerbated the negative sentiment against what the public saw as Han’s brazen attitude and the judiciary’s opportunistic way of handling her case.

Han insisted she was “innocent in the court of history and conscience” in a statement released shortly after the top court announced its verdict against her. She claimed the ruling was unjust and politically motivated.

The Supreme Court found Han, who served as prime minister from 2006-07 under the late liberal President Roh Moo-hyun, guilty of receiving 880 million won ($760,000) in illegal political funds from the head of a construction company in 2007. The ruling deprived Han of her parliamentary seat, reducing the number of seats held by the main opposition New Politics Alliance for Democracy to 128.

Her protestations of innocence have only amplified public criticism of her attitude. Han, who has become the first former prime minister to serve a jail term, should have apologized for receiving the illicit funds, part of which were used by her sister to pay rent.

It is also deplorable that the NPAD has blindly sided with Han, with its leader, Rep. Moon Jae-in, describing the ruling made unanimously by Supreme Court justices as distanced from common sense and justice.

The prevailing public perception, however, is that Han benefited from the judiciary dragging its feet on her case out of political consideration. She stood trial for the first time at a district court five years ago. It took nearly two years for the Supreme Court to reach a final ruling on her case.

The delayed process enabled Han to serve most of her four-year term as a member of the 19th National Assembly, which was set to expire in May 2016.

Some critics raised the suspicion that Chief Justice Yang Sung-tae had been using the case to draw cooperation from the opposition party in amending the law on the judicial structure to set up a new appellate court. Whether Yang had such an ulterior motive or not, the delayed ruling may only turn the public against the proposed amendment.

The Supreme Court should not belittle itself just to gain favor with a political party. Han’s case should serve to caution it against degrading its dignity again by giving the impression of being as political as politicians.