South Korea Appeals Court Increases Yoon Suk Yeol Sentence To Seven Years

A South Korean appeals court increased the prison sentence of jailed former President Yoon Suk Yeol to seven years on Wednesday, according to the Seoul High Court, in a case for obstruction of arrest and related charges.

The Global Times said the court overturned the lower court’s ruling and lengthened Yoon’s prison term from five to seven years, adding that the court said blocking the first attempt to arrest Yoon constituted abuse of power and special obstruction of official duties.

@globaltimesnews

France 24, citing AFP, reported that the appeals court increased the sentence of jailed former president Yoon Suk Yeol on Wednesday to seven years for obstructing justice, up from five years, and quoted a judge at the Seoul High Court saying, "The court sentences the defendant to seven years in prison."

Korea JoongAng Daily described the same Wednesday decision as a seven-year sentence by the Seoul High Court for obstruction of official duties and abuse of authority, two years longer than the five-year imprisonment handed down in his first trial on the same charges.

The Korea Times similarly said the Seoul High Court increased Yoon’s prison term to seven years, up from the five years handed down in the first trial, and quoted Judge Yoon Seong-sik saying Yoon "betrayed his presidential duty."

Multiple outlets also tied the obstruction case to Yoon’s short-lived 2024 martial law bid, with DW saying the appeals court hiked Yoon’s sentence from five years to seven in a justice obstruction case linked to his short-lived 2024 martial law.

The decision came after both Yoon and the prosecution lodged appeals, with France 24 reporting that Yoon argued the arrest warrants were based on an "unlawful investigation" while special prosecutors sought 10 years given his "egregious" crimes.

The obstruction-of-justice appeal was rooted in events surrounding Yoon Suk Yeol’s emergency martial law declaration on the night of Dec. 3, 2024, which the Global Times said was revoked hours later by the National Assembly.

Global Times reported that Yoon was indicted under detention in January 2025 as a suspected ringleader of the insurrection, becoming the first sitting president to be arrested and indicted, and it described the Corruption Investigation Office for High-ranking Officials (CIO) as once thwarted in its attempt to arrest Yoon when the presidential security service formed human shields and bus blockades to prevent investigators from entering the presidential residence.

@globaltimesnews

France 24 said the lower court had handed Yoon the initial sentence in January after he was found to have used presidential security agents to block his own arrest, and it described the appeals court as upholding his conviction for abuse of power for excluding cabinet members from a meeting to plan the imposition of martial law.

Korea JoongAng Daily added that Yoon was detained by the CIO after its second attempt on Jan. 15, 2025, about a month after his impeachment by the National Assembly, and it said the CIO aborted its first attempt on Jan. 3 after a five-and-a-half-hour standoff with the Presidential Security Service.

DW described Yoon’s Dec. 3, 2024 televised address as declaring the suspension of civilian rule, and it said martial law lasted about six hours as lawmakers rushed to the assembly building and voted it down in an emergency session.

NPR and the Killeen Daily Herald, both drawing on AP, described the Dec. 3 martial law decree as triggering a severe political crisis, paralyzing politics and high-level diplomacy and rattling financial markets, and they said the turmoil eased only after Lee Jae Myung won an early presidential election in June.

The Korea Herald and UPI also framed the obstruction case as tied to the failed 2024 martial law decree and said the Seoul High Court’s insurrection-related division issued the first appellate decision in the case.

In its ruling, the Seoul High Court said Yoon’s actions were “highly reprehensible” and described the legal basis for the arrest warrants and the obstruction.

France 24 quoted a judge at the Seoul High Court saying, "The defendant not only sought to obstruct the lawful execution of warrants by prosecutors and others," and it added that the judge said Yoon "also issued unlawful instructions to public officials of the presidential security service, who are national civil servants, attempting to use them as if they were private guards for his personal protection."

The Global Times similarly said the court explained that the execution of the first arrest warrant for Yoon was lawful while the search warrant for the president residence was lawfully executed, and it said blocking the second arrest attempt also constituted abuse of power.

Korea JoongAng Daily described the appeals court as refuting Yoon’s claim that CIO officials should not have entered his residence, quoting the court’s reasoning that "it is difficult to conclude that entering the presidential residence to execute the initial warrant would harm significant national interests, and therefore the execution of the warrant cannot be deemed unlawful."

The Korea Times quoted Judge Yoon Seong-sik saying Yoon "betrayed his presidential duty," and it said the appeals court found Yoon infringed on the deliberation rights of nine Cabinet members left out of the Cabinet meeting that preceded the martial law decree.

UPI reported that special counsel Cho Eun-suk’s team had sought a 10-year prison term for Yoon, and it said Yoon’s lawyers vowed to appeal the ruling to the Supreme Court, calling it "unacceptable."

NPR and the Killeen Daily Herald, both drawing on AP, quoted Yoon’s lawyer Yoo Jeong-hwa calling the verdict "very disappointing" and said the legal team would appeal to the Supreme Court.

While all outlets described the same seven-year sentence by the Seoul High Court on Wednesday, they emphasized different aspects of the ruling and the surrounding crisis.

France 24 foregrounded the appeals court’s characterization of Yoon’s conduct as “highly reprehensible,” quoting the judge’s language that Yoon’s actions were "highly reprehensible" and detailing how the court said he issued unlawful instructions to presidential security officials “as if they were private guards.”

CGTN

The Korea Herald focused on the appeals court’s status as the first appellate decision from a special court division handling insurrection-related cases and described the special counsel’s sought “combined 10-year prison term” for Yoon on charges including obstruction of the execution of an arrest warrant and spreading false information to foreign media.

Korea JoongAng Daily concentrated on the Cabinet deliberation rights issue, quoting the court’s statement that Yoon "completely failed to notify seven Cabinet members" and describing how the appellate court found the notice was given at a point when it was effectively impossible for two absent ministers to attend.

DW and NPR both stressed the obstruction narrative around resisting law enforcement efforts, with DW quoting the Seoul High Court judge saying, "In trying to stop authorities from executing an arrest warrant by use of force, Yoon committed acts that are unacceptable in a society of law and order," while NPR described the conviction as resisting arrest and bypassing a legitimate Cabinet meeting.

The Global Times framed the legal reasoning around abuse of power and “special obstruction of official duties,” and it described the court’s explanation that blocking the first and second arrest attempts constituted abuse of power.

The Korea Times, by contrast, highlighted the court’s moral framing, quoting Judge Yoon Seong-sik that Yoon "betrayed his presidential duty," and it linked the obstruction case to tampering with documents and shaping the narrative abroad.

The ruling deepened Yoon Suk Yeol’s legal exposure and set up further appeals, with multiple outlets reporting that his lawyers would take the case to the Supreme Court.

France 24 said Yoon’s lawyers told AFP they would appeal to the Supreme Court, and it also noted that Yoon is serving a life sentence for leading an insurrection, a result of his failed attempt to impose martial law in 2024.

CGTN

NPR and the Killeen Daily Herald reported that Yoon’s legal team would appeal to the Supreme Court after the seven-year sentence, and they described the broader procedural posture as a set of continuing criminal trials.

DW said Yoon may still appeal this sentence at the Supreme Court, and it reiterated that he was handed a life sentence in February for leading an insurrection.

The Global Times described how Yoon was indicted under detention in January 2025 as a suspected ringleader of the insurrection and said he was charged with abusing the presidential security service to hinder the anti-corruption agency from executing its arrest warrant in January 2025.

Several outlets also tied the obstruction case to other pending or separate proceedings, including a separate trial over allegations that Yoon aided the enemy by sending military drones into North Korea earlier in 2024, with France 24 saying special prosecutors are seeking a 30-year sentence in that case and quoting Yoon’s legal team denial that he gave "no prior order or subsequent approval" for the operation cited by prosecutors.

France 24 also reported that Yoon’s wife, former first lady Kim Keon Hee, is in prison for unrelated corruption crimes and that her penalty was increased to four years on Tuesday after an appeals court reversed her acquittal for stock price manipulation.