President Yoon's side: ”He should be released immediately...We will hold the prosecution responsible for the illegal detention” = Korean media

As the court approved the request to revoke the arrest of President Yoon Seok-yeol, who was arrested and indicted on charges of leading a civil unrest, President Yoon's legal team called on the prosecution to release him immediately.
On the 7th, President Yoon's legal team appealed through the media, saying, "The president must be released immediately following the court's decision to revoke his detention."
President Yoon's legal team said, "The immediate appeal provision has already been ruled unconstitutional in a similar case involving the suspension of detention, so the suspension of detention should not be revoked.
"Even if they are fully aware of this, if the prosecution does not immediately take charge of President Yoon's release, the prosecutor in charge will be
"We will hold them legally responsible for their illegal detention," the prosecution said. The prosecution has been reviewing the legal grounds for President Yoon's release since around 2 p.m. on the day the court ruled that President Yoon's detention should be waived.
The special investigation headquarters for the prosecution's emergency martial law said at around 10 p.m. on the same day that it was still considering whether to file an immediate appeal, and that "no decision has been made yet." "Once a decision is made, it will be made public."
If the prosecution gives up on the immediate appeal, President Yoon will be released immediately. However, some are of the opinion that the prosecution could appeal even if it takes the lead in releasing President Yoon.
On the same day, the court accepted President Yoon's argument that he was indicted after his detention period had expired, and that it was appropriate to calculate the detention period based on "actual time" rather than the number of days.
It is a judgment. The Criminal Procedure Law stipulates that the period during which investigation-related documents and other materials were on the court for the purpose of questioning the suspect before detention should not be included in the period of detention.
The court argued that the calculation method was not appropriate. The court said, "In light of the principles of physical freedom and non-custodial investigation stipulated in the Constitution and the Criminal Procedure Act, detention should only be limited to the period during which investigation-related documents were in the court.
"If it is not interpreted that way, the detention period will increase, and the detention period will change depending on when the documents are accepted and returned," he said.
"This will lead to various irrationalities," the court said. The court also found that the reasons for revoking President Yoon's detention were acceptable from the perspective of ensuring procedural clarity.
President Yoon's side said, "The High-Ranking Public Officials Crime Investigation Agency Act does not include the crime of treason within its scope of investigation.
According to Article 2, Paragraph 4 of the Law on the Investigation Agency for Crimes Against High-Ranking Public Officials, the crime is related to the abuse of authority and obstruction of the exercise of rights, so the Agency claims it has the authority to investigate the crime of treason.
"There is no evidence or materials sufficient to determine that the crime of treason exists during the investigation into the crime of obstructing the exercise of public officials' rights," he said, adding, "Although the High-Ranking Public Officials Crime Investigation Agency and the Public Prosecutor's Office are independent investigative agencies,
"They mutually agreed to use the detention period stipulated by the Criminal Procedure Act without any legal basis, and while they transferred the defendant's custody in the process, they did not take steps to retrieve him."
The court said, "There are no clear provisions in the High-Ranking Public Officials Crime Investigation Agency Act and other related laws regarding the circumstances presented by the defense attorneys, and there has been no Supreme Court interpretation or ruling on this matter.
"It is desirable to eliminate any doubt regarding the legality of the investigation process by aiming for procedural clarity, and it is appropriate to decide to revoke the detention."
He added, "If we continue with the criminal trial proceedings while leaving these arguments as they are, not only will the reasons for the dismissal in the advanced trial be unclear, but the recent
This could be grounds for a retrial after a considerable period of time has passed, as was the case in the case of Kim Jae-gyu, who was found guilty of assassinating then-President Park Chung-hee and granted a retrial.
"It's a good idea to do that," he added.