Court Enters Recess... Yoon's Sedition Trial Additional Date Dispute Continues [This Week's Trial Schedule]

[Financial News] The court enters the summer recess from this week (July 28th~August 1st). The struggle continues between the sedition special prosecutor team (Cho Eun-seok Special Prosecutor) and former President Yoon Seok-yeol's side over setting additional dates in the sedition trial regarding martial law. As the court has mentioned the possibility of arresting former President Yoon, who is not attending, attention is focused on whether additional dates will be set.
According to the legal community on the 27th, the Seoul Central District Court Criminal Agreement Division 25 (Judge Ji Gwi-yeon) has not set additional dates this week until today. With the court entering the summer recess, it seems the court is deliberating over setting additional dates.
The struggle between the special prosecutor and former President Yoon's side continues. At the trial on the 24th, the special prosecutor emphasized the need for forced attendance of former President Yoon, who is not appearing for summons and trial. The court continued witness questioning in the 'evidence investigation outside the date' method for former President Yoon, who was absent for the third time following the 10th and 17th, which the special prosecutor pointed out. Former President Yoon refused the special prosecutor's summons investigation on health grounds while in custody on the 11th and 14th.
Special Prosecutor Park Eok-su said, "Considering that this case itself undermines the constitutional function and threatens the existence of the state, the public's desire for a speedy trial is greater than any other case," and requested the court to set additional dates so that the exhausting debate can end as soon as possible if additional dates are not possible during the recess due to unavoidable circumstances. The special prosecutor also argued that if the defense team refuses to set additional dates in the trial of Kim Yong-hyun, former Minister of National Defense, and other key sedition mission workers, a public defender should be appointed to continue the trial.
Former President Yoon's side said, "The defense team is proactively agreeing to the special prosecutor's request and cooperating so that unnecessary witnesses do not appear, but it is not appropriate to say that we are delaying the proceedings," and "We agreed to a considerable number of witnesses, and yet continuing to say this is unreasonable." They expressed displeasure at the special prosecutor's claim for appointing a public defender, saying "mentioning a public defender is really unpleasant."
Also, the special prosecutor and former President Yoon's side clashed over the forced attendance of former President Yoon, who did not comply with the trial and summons investigation.
The special prosecutor explained the need for forced attendance of former President Yoon. "The defendant attended the regular trial nine times and did not make any claims regarding health reasons during that period," and "He also attended the detention review court, which lasted for 4 hours and 50 minutes," they pointed out. They continued, "Ultimately, in the situation where he was absent without just cause for the last two dates, he was absent again without just cause," and requested the issuance of an arrest warrant, saying "As the defendant has shirked his duty to appear and was absent three times in a row, please issue an arrest warrant."
Former President Yoon's side countered, citing health reasons and problems with the special prosecutor's maintenance of the prosecution. They argued that "There has never been a case where the special prosecutor maintained the prosecution by taking over a case under prosecution from the prosecution," and "There are criticisms that the investigation procedure itself, such as the request for an arrest warrant, is problematic by splitting the facts related to the already indicted sedition charges into subsidiary and peripheral parts, and that is also a reason for absence." They also added, "There has never been a case where the special prosecutor maintained the prosecution by taking over the prosecution maintenance right from the prosecution based on the special prosecutor law, which has unconstitutional elements in the already indicted trial," and "We will also apply for a constitutional review to see if such a system is possible under our country's constitution."
The court said, "As the situation of continuous non-appearance continues, we need to investigate the refusal to appear," and "We will check with the prison whether the health condition is really bad and whether arrest is possible," intervening in the matter.
The ongoing struggle between the special prosecutor and former President Yoon's side is expected to continue even during the recess. While the court continues to deliberate on whether to set additional dates, both sides are expected to continue conveying their positions to the court. Especially since the special prosecutor's summons investigation has not been conducted at all after former President Yoon was detained, the special prosecutor is expected to focus on solidifying the charges through forced attendance of former President Yoon and setting additional dates.

theknight@fnnews.com Jeong Kyung-soo Reporter