Former President Yoon Seok-yeol was finally rearrested on the morning of July 10, after undergoing a suspect interrogation prior to arrest (warrant review) on the night of July 9. The court fully accepted the arguments of the Jo Eun-seok Rebellion Special Prosecutor's Team (Special Prosecutor), citing 'concerns of evidence destruction' as the reason. This development is seen as a boomerang effect of former President Yoon's consistent uncooperative attitude towards investigative agencies since the December 3 illegal martial law incident, and his use of various legal means, which earned him criticism as a "slippery eel."

Court's Short but Strong Reason for Arrest: "Concerns of Evidence Destruction" 

Seoul Central District Court's Chief Judge Nam Se-jin, who is in charge of warrants, issued the arrest warrant for former President Yoon on the morning of the 10th, stating a brief but clear reason: "concerns of evidence destruction." Former President Yoon's side had argued that there was no possibility of evidence destruction as police and prosecutorial investigations had already progressed significantly, and he had been impeached from the presidency. However, the court did not accept this argument.

The strong judgment by the court is analyzed to stem from deep concerns that if former President Yoon remained free, he might pressure key aides or related individuals to retract their testimonies. Indeed, former Presidential Security Service Deputy Chief Kim Sung-hoon and former Presidential Office Aide Kang Eui-goo reportedly changed their statements during police and special prosecutor investigations depending on whether Yoon's legal counsel was present. The special prosecutor views this as Yoon's side exerting influence to induce statements favorable to him.

Furthermore, the special prosecutor emphasized that the majority of former President Yoon's alleged crimes were committed by mobilizing subordinates using his position and authority as president, arguing that there was a very high possibility he would exert undue pressure on key witnesses. In particular, the special prosecutor pointed out that Yoon's alleged instruction to delete secure phone communication records of former Defense Security Command Commander Yeo In-hyung and others, in preparation for the investigation, itself constitutes subornation of evidence destruction. This likely served as strong circumstantial evidence of actual attempts to destroy evidence, beyond mere concerns of it.

Eight Charges Effectively Substantiated… Special Prosecutor's Key Evidence Adopted 

The issuance of this arrest warrant implies the court's judgment that the eight charges against former President Yoon have been substantiated to some extent. The charges presented by the special prosecutor are as follows:

Obstruction of Arrest Warrant Execution (Obstruction of Special Official Duties, etc.): This charge alleges that former President Yoon physically obstructed the execution of his arrest warrant or instructed related individuals to obstruct it. This was treated seriously as it involves systematically impeding the lawful exercise of public authority.
Infringement of Cabinet Members' Deliberation Rights (Abuse of Power): This charge alleges abuse of power, such as preventing specific cabinet members from participating in State Council meetings or depriving them of their deliberation rights. This was judged to have undermined the fundamental principles of state administration.
Post-Facto Martial Law Proclamation Document Creation (Fabrication/Use of False Official Documents): This charge alleges the fraudulent creation and use of a proclamation document for martial law that had already ended after the December 3 martial law proclamation. This raises suspicions of document manipulation to secure the legitimacy of martial law.
In addition to these, various charges related to illegal acts concerning martial law, such as instructions to suppress illegal protests and media control, were included.

Under the Criminal Procedure Act, an arrest warrant is issued when there is "sufficient reason to suspect that the suspect has committed a crime." This indicates that the special prosecutor succeeded in convincing the court by securing vast amounts of evidence, including statements from individuals involved in the case and call records. In particular, the consistent testimonies of related parties and objective call records supporting them likely had a decisive impact on the court's decision.

Former President Yoon's Complete Denial, but Failure to Convince the Court 

Former President Yoon's side completely denied all charges and actively mounted a defense:

Regarding the charge of infringement of cabinet members' deliberation rights: They claimed, "We did not prevent specific cabinet members from coming or disallow their participation in meetings."
Regarding the charge of martial law proclamation document creation: They countered, "Former Chief Kang only created the 'cover' for the martial law proclamation, not the document itself."
Regarding the charge of instructing the deletion of secure phone call records: They argued, "National Intelligence Service First Deputy Director Hong Jang-won publicly released photos of secure phone call details to the media, leading to a breach of security regulations, so the Security Service was asked to review whether appropriate measures were in place," claiming it was a security review, not an instruction to destroy evidence.
Regarding the charge of obstructing arrest warrant execution: They protested, "The investigations are not being conducted at all into the Anti-Corruption Investigation Office for High-ranking Officials (CIO) and the police, who carried out improper official duties, but only into the acts of obstructing arrest. This is an investigation of the victim by the perpetrator," asserting that they were the victims.
Furthermore, former President Yoon's side expressed distrust in the special prosecutor's investigation itself, stating, "The special prosecutor, who should guarantee political neutrality and fairness in work, is conducting the most political and biased investigation," but this had no effect on the court's judgment.

Special Prosecutor's Next Steps: Indictment with Detention and Investigation into Foreign Exchange Allegations 

The special prosecutor is expected to conduct supplementary investigations and indict former President Yoon with detention by the end of this month, when his detention period expires. They have already been conducting extensive investigations, summoning key figures including former Prime Minister Han Duck-soo, other cabinet members, and officials from the Presidential Security Service. After additional indictments against former President Yoon, the special prosecutor plans to focus their investigative efforts on key allegations requiring long-term investigation, such as foreign exchange allegations.

In particular, the foreign exchange allegation that Yoon ordered the deployment of Pyongyang drones to create a pretext for martial law is considered a crucial task that will determine the success of this special prosecutor's investigation. The special prosecutor has also stated regarding the foreign exchange allegations that "a significant number of military officials are being investigated," indicating substantial progress in this area of the investigation.

Desperate Resistance, Possibility of Applying for Review of Legality of Detention 

Former President Yoon's side has shown desperate resistance, raising objections at every stage of the criminal justice process, including objections to the arrest warrant, review of the legality of detention, and suspect interrogation prior to arrest. On March 8, the court accepted Yoon's request for cancellation of detention, leading to his release 52 days after his arrest.

There is a very high possibility that former President Yoon will apply for a review of the legality of detention again, and if the application is accepted, the timing of his indictment may be slightly delayed. However, given that he was rearrested for the clear reason of "concerns of evidence destruction," it is widely believed that release, as before, will not be easy. As former President Yoon's legal risks reach their peak, the attention of the political circle and the public is focused on the upcoming trial process.