Special prosecutors seek 30-year term for Yoon Suk Yeol over alleged 2024 drone flights
Special prosecutors seek a 30-year prison term for former president Yoon Suk Yeol over alleged October 2024 drone flights intended to provoke North Korea. (154 characters)
Former president Yoon Suk Yeol faces a request from a South Korean special prosecution team for a 30-year prison sentence, accused of ordering military drones over North Korea in October 2024 that prosecutors say were intended to provoke a retaliatory response. The request, made in the late stages of a trial at the Seoul Central District Court, also asks for a 25-year term for former defence minister Kim Young-hyun under the same charges. The prosecution, led by special prosecutor Cho Yun-suk, says the alleged operation was linked to a later attempt to justify emergency measures.
Prosecutors’ sentencing demands
The special prosecution team formally recommended a 30-year jail term for Yoon Suk Yeol and 25 years for Kim Young-hyun during closing stages of proceedings at the Seoul Central District Court. The request frames the alleged drone flights as a central act in a wider plot that prosecutors contend aimed to manufacture a crisis.
Prosecutors told the court they believe the October 2024 flights were deliberately timed and directed to elicit a hostile North Korean reaction. They argue the anticipated response would have provided political cover for Yoon’s subsequent actions in December 2024.
Allegations about the October 2024 drone operation
According to the prosecution’s account, military drones were sent over North Korean territory in October 2024 under orders from senior officials. The team contends that the flights constituted an unlawful act that placed national security and diplomatic stability at risk.
The case narrative presented by investigators asserts the operation was not an isolated tactical mission but part of an attempt to create a narrative of external threat. That narrative, prosecutors say, was then used to portray political opponents as sympathetic to North Korea and to justify extraordinary measures.
Connection to the December 3, 2024 martial law declaration
Prosecutors say the alleged drone incident preceded by roughly two months the declaration of martial law by Yoon on December 3, 2024. They argue the timing indicates the flights were meant to trigger a chain of events culminating in the emergency decree.
Yoon announced the imposition of martial law on December 3, 2024, but the National Assembly revoked the measure hours later. Prosecutors maintain that the short-lived declaration was part of a broader scheme that included the alleged drone operation as a catalyst.
Charges filed and legal timeline
Yoon Suk Yeol, Kim Young-hyun and a former counterintelligence commander were formally charged with high treason in November 2025, according to prosecutors’ filings. The high-treason indictment marks a rare and grave step in South Korean legal history, reflecting the severity of the allegations.
Yoon was detained in January 2025 as a suspect in leading an insurrection, a move that made him the first sitting South Korean president to be arrested and formally charged while in office. The prosecution’s case has since unfolded in the Seoul Central District Court, where evidence and witness testimony have been presented over several months.
Defence statements and courtroom posture
Lawyers for Yoon denied the allegations immediately and have urged the court to reject the prosecution’s narrative. Defence teams have challenged the factual basis of the prosecution’s assertions and sought to dispute the linkage between any flight operations and the later declaration of martial law.
At the hearing in which prosecutors sought the long prison terms, Yoon’s legal team did not provide an immediate public comment on the sentence request. The court will now weigh the prosecution’s recommendations alongside defence evidence and legal argumentation before reaching a verdict.
Political and security implications
The prosecution’s sentencing request intensifies an already fraught political crisis in South Korea and poses questions about civil-military relations and executive authority. If convictions are secured, the case could reshape public debate over the use of emergency powers and the oversight of military operations.
Observers note the broader implications for inter-Korean relations, given that the charges hinge on actions alleged to have been aimed at provoking Pyongyang. The trial underscores the sensitivity of military operations near the demilitarised zone and the domestic political costs of perceived manipulations of national security threats.
The court’s decision will be closely watched at home and abroad for its legal precedent and its potential impact on South Korea’s political landscape.
