Yoon Suk-yeol sentenced in South Korea’s first martial law verdict

A South Korean court has sentenced former president Yoon Suk-yeol to five years in prison, delivering the country’s first-ever verdict related to the abuse of martial law powers. The ruling has been widely described as historic, setting a significant precedent for presidential accountability in South Korea.

Judges found that Yoon had unlawfully declared martial law during his presidency, exceeding constitutional limits on executive authority and undermining civilian rule. The court ruled that the move constituted a serious abuse of power, rejecting arguments that the declaration was justified by national security concerns. Prosecutors had argued that the action threatened democratic order and bypassed established legal safeguards.

The sentence represents a rare moment in which a former South Korean leader has been held criminally responsible for actions taken while in office. While South Korea has previously prosecuted ex-presidents for corruption, the case marks the first time a court has issued a verdict directly tied to martial law, a power historically associated with authoritarian rule in the country’s past.

Legal experts say the decision reinforces judicial independence and clarifies the limits of presidential emergency powers. It also sends a strong signal to future leaders that constitutional boundaries will be enforced, even at the highest level of government. Supporters of the ruling argue it strengthens democratic norms, while critics warn it could deepen political divisions.

Public reaction has been mixed but intense, reflecting broader tensions in South Korean politics. For many, the verdict is seen as a reaffirmation of the rule of law and a reminder of the country’s hard-won democratic safeguards. Others fear it may fuel instability during an already polarised period.

The case is expected to influence debates over executive power, constitutional reform and political accountability in South Korea for years to come.