Regarding the recent release of attorneys Lee Ha-sang and Kwon Woo-hyun, the defense team for former Minister of National Defense Kim Yong-hyun, de...
Presiding Judge Lee Jin-gwan of Criminal Division 33 of the Seoul Central District Court, who is overseeing the case against former Prime Minister Han Duck-soo on charges including aiding the leader of an insurrection, speaks in the courtroom.
Provided by the Seoul Central District Court Regarding the recent release of attorneys Lee Ha-sang and Kwon Woo-hyun, the defense team for former Minister of National Defense Kim Yong-hyun, despite contempt detention orders, the court emphasized that it will “verify their personal information in accordance with due procedure and then enforce the detention decision again.” It also stated that there were additional acts of contempt of court during the contempt proceedings and that criminal action is under review. While proceeding on the 24th with the insurrection case of former Prime Minister Han Duck-soo, Criminal Division 33 of the Seoul Central District Court said, “These matters relate to this case; as there appear to be various misunderstandings and the court position may not be clear, we are making this statement.” The judge said, “With regard to the contempt proceedings held on the previous date, we plan to enforce them again. We will verify their personal information in accordance with due procedure and supplement the paperwork to meet detention center requirements.” He then said there were additional acts of contempt of court during the closed contempt hearing. The judge said, “A person identified as Kwon stated to the bench, ‘So you want to do this?’, ‘See you at the CIO ,’” and added, “This constitutes an act of contempt of court not included in the detention decision, and a separate contempt proceeding will be held.” On the 19th, attorneys Lee and Kwon requested that a support person be present for the side of former Minister Kim, who appeared as a witness in the case of former Prime Minister Han, but the bench denied the request, saying the Criminal Procedure Act did not permit accompaniment of a support person in that situation. In response, the attorneys shouted in court that this was abuse of authority, and the bench ordered them to leave, but they continued to cause a disturbance. The bench then held a separate hearing and imposed 15 days of contempt detention on each, but they were released about four hours later because the orders could not be executed. During the contempt hearing, the attorneys refused to testify, so names, resident registration numbers, and other items were omitted from the paperwork; the Seoul Detention Center said detention could not proceed unless this was supplemented. The court ultimately determined that enforcement of the detention was difficult and stayed the execution order. After release, the two attorneys appeared on the YouTube channel ‘Attack of the Lawyers’ and hurled insults at the bench, saying “this damn ××,” and continued with blunt criticism such as “Stop making a fuss and conduct the trial properly.” In response, the bench emphasized that “institutional improvements are needed so this never happens again.” The judge said, “Contempt detention, like arrest of a flagrant offender, is a procedure in which the perpetrator of the offense is immediately detained and handed over to a detention center,” adding, “Since there is no chance that an innocent person would be punished, the requirements to provide personal information need to be further relaxed.” He continued, “The court does not wish to quarrel with partner institutions. This is not about apportioning blame, but about making sure this does not happen again. We understand the Ministry of Justice has also spoken on the matter,” and added, “As I have said repeatedly, maintaining order in court is the duty of the judiciary, and I will exercise all available authority.” He also said, “Criminal action is also underway against the two in question,” and, “Because the effectiveness of the contempt procedure would otherwise be lost, we have no choice but to move to the next step accordingly. We will exercise the core powers of the bench and maintain order more strictly.” He also said those who caused other disturbances in the courtroom would be punished severely. The judge said, “At about the time of adjournment after the witness examination regarding Yoon Suk-yeol at the last session, one person in the gallery shouted the slogan ‘I support Yoon Suk-yeol’ and exited the courtroom,” adding, “The bench regards this as ‘causing a disturbance in court and then fleeing.’” He continued, “Because attendance at this trial is controlled by gallery passes, it should be possible to verify the personal information of the person who acted. We will compile various materials and hold a separate contempt hearing on this as well.”