Two former key military commanders decline to answer on night of martial law citing concerns over their ongoing criminal trials

Lee Jin-woo, former head of the Capital Defense Command, testifies during the fifth hearing of President Yoon Suk Yeol's impeachment trial held at the Constitutional Court of Korea in Seoul on Tuesday. (Newsis)
Lee Jin-woo, former head of the Capital Defense Command, testifies during the fifth hearing of President Yoon Suk Yeol's impeachment trial held at the Constitutional Court of Korea in Seoul on Tuesday. (Newsis)

Two of South Korea's top ex-military commanders declined to comment on the situation on the night of Yoon Suk Yeol's botched Dec. 3 martial law declaration, while testifying at the fifth hearing of the suspended president's impeachment trial on Tuesday.

Although they declined to answer many of the questions from both the National Assembly’s side and Yoon’s legal team, citing concerns over their ongoing criminal trials, they left some key remarks implying that Yoon and then-Defense Minister Kim Yong-hyun had planned the martial law declaration on Dec. 3.

The witnesses set to testify Tuesday were: Lee Jin-woo, former head of the Capital Defense Command; Yeo In-hyung, former head of the Defense Counterintelligence Command; and Hong Jang-won, former first deputy director of the National Intelligence Service.

They were called in at the request of the Assembly’s legal team, which is acting as the prosecutor in Yoon’s impeachment trial.

When the National Assembly’s lawyer asked Lee whether Yoon had indeed instructed him to "drag out" the lawmakers from inside the Assembly building and specifically used the word “gun,” citing investigation records from the prosecution, Lee said he doesn’t remember.

Lee was arrested and indicted on Dec. 31 last year on charges of engaging in important duties related to insurrection and the abuse of power. He is accused of deploying troops to the National Assembly under the orders of ex-Defense Minister Kim Yong-hyun prior to Yoon's declaration of martial law. Additionally, he is alleged to have collaborated with the police to station troops inside the Assembly building.

Lee reiterated that he "wasn’t able to fully grasp the situation" that night.

“Prior to Yoon’s televised Dec. 3 martial law declaration, (then Defense) Minister Kim had told me that I should go to the military unit in advance and wait there, because something might happen. …I thought that the president, as the representative of the people and the commander-in-chief of the armed forces, who had even served as prosecutor general, was an expert on the law. So when the president addressed the nation through a broadcast and said those things, there was no room for me to think it was illegal or unconstitutional,” Lee told justices during the hearing on Tuesday.

Lee also added that he understood the situation to be "the start of a military operation."

“From a military perspective, a nationwide speech by the president is understood to serve as strategic guidelines (for a military operation.) It is a critical element in maintaining situational awareness for the military,” Lee said.

While arguing that he couldn't exactly recall the situation that night, he admitted to having received calls from Yoon on three occasions and also submitted an operation proposal for a national emergency situation to then-Defense Minister Kim.

“As a soldier communicating with three phones in an armored vehicle during an operation, I don’t clearly remember everything I said. So, I’m also curious how such detailed statements (from other witnesses) are being made. It feels fragmented, like scattered pieces,” Lee told justices.

Yeo In-hyung, former head of the Defense Counterintelligence Command, also appeared at the court as the second witness.

Yeo allegedly received orders from then-Defense Minister Kim to arrest and detain opposition Democratic Party Chair Rep. Lee Jae-myung and then ruling People Power Party Chair Han Dong-hoon, along with at least a dozen others.

When asked, he said he could not answer about that.

“This is something that must be dealt with critically during the criminal trial, so I would refuse to elaborate more on that,” Yeo told lawyers during examination from the Assembly’s side.

“I recently reviewed thousands of pages of evidence records I received, and I found that there are numerous statements that completely contradict the testimony mentioned,” he said.

Yeo added that "it was not easy to determine whether it was lawful or unlawful in the brief moment" when Yoon declared martial law on Dec. 3.

Supporters of suspended President Yoon Suk Yeol are seen in front of the Constitutional Court of Korea in Jongno-gu, Seoul on Tuesday. (Yonhap)
Supporters of suspended President Yoon Suk Yeol are seen in front of the Constitutional Court of Korea in Jongno-gu, Seoul on Tuesday. (Yonhap)

Meanwhile, Yoon's legal representatives on Tuesday submitted a request to cancel his detention to the Seoul Central District Court's Criminal Division 25.

According to Article 93 of the Criminal Procedure Act, the court may cancel detention upon the request of a prosecutor, defendant or defense counsel when the grounds for such detention no longer exist or have ceased. Article 55 of the Criminal Procedure Act stipulates that the court must decide on such requests within seven days, barring special circumstances.

Local media reported that if the application for cancellation of detention is denied, Yoon's team is considering filing for bail. Bail allows the defendant to be released under certain conditions.

The sixth hearing of Yoon’s impeachment trial is set for Thursday. The hearing will call in other key military and presidential office figures such as Kim Hyun-tae, commander of the 707th Special Mission Group; Kwak Jong-geun, commander of the Army Special Warfare Command; and Park Chun-sup, senior secretary for economic affairs in the Presidential Office.