On the afternoon of February 12, 2026, the Seoul Central District Court became the focal point of South Korea’s ongoing reckoning with the events of the December 3, 2024, emergency martial law—now widely recognized by the courts as a rebellion. Former Minister of the Interior and Safety, Lee Sang-min, arrived at the courthouse for his first trial sentencing, a proceeding that had been scheduled for 2:00 PM but began about 17 minutes late due to a delay in the defendant’s vehicle, as reported by KBS. The trial, presided over by Judge Ryu Kyung-jin of Criminal Division 32, was broadcast live, underscoring the intense public and political interest surrounding the case.
Lee, who served as the head of the Ministry of the Interior and Safety during the tumultuous period, faced a litany of charges: most notably, participating in important duties in a rebellion, ordering power and water cuts to media outlets, and perjury. According to News1, the hearing took place at 2:32 PM, marking the culmination of a legal process that began with Lee’s indictment in August 2025 and included two preparatory hearings and 14 trial sessions over six months.
The prosecution, as YTN reported, had called for a 15-year prison sentence at the previous month’s conclusion hearing. They argued that Lee, a former judge well-versed in legal and constitutional matters, could not have been unaware of the gravity and illegality of his actions. The prosecution’s case centered on Lee’s alleged role in executing orders from then-President Yoon Seok-youl to cut off electricity and water to media companies, including prominent outlets like Hankyoreh and Kyunghyang Shinmun, during the martial law period. This, they asserted, was an attempt to suppress press freedom and control the flow of information at a critical moment for the nation.
Evidence presented by the prosecution included CCTV footage from the presidential office. As detailed by YTN, the footage showed Lee spending over 30 minutes in the president’s office, using his phone to search for terms like “constitution” and “Government Organization Act.” After leaving the office, Lee was seen nodding as President Yoon spoke to him, repeatedly pulling a document from his inner jacket pocket and reading it. Later, after the declaration of martial law, Lee was observed in a 16-minute one-on-one meeting with then-Prime Minister Han Deok-soo, where they appeared to be reading and discussing documents, at times even laughing together. The prosecution maintained that these documents were the very instructions for the power and water cuts.
Lee, for his part, denied the core allegations. He claimed that while he had seen the document in question, his subsequent call to then-Fire Commissioner Heo Seok-gon was out of concern, not to relay illegal orders. Furthermore, Lee asserted that the document seen in the CCTV footage was merely his personal schedule, not the controversial instruction sheet. According to Goodmorning Chungcheong, Lee also denied ever having received direct orders from President Yoon to cut power and water to the media, a point he reiterated during his testimony in the impeachment trial of the former president in February 2025.
The court, however, found otherwise. Drawing on the precedent set in the January 2026 trial of former Prime Minister Han Deok-soo, where the December 3 martial law was officially recognized as a rebellion, Judge Ryu Kyung-jin’s panel determined that Lee had, in fact, received and acted on the instruction document from President Yoon. The court concluded that Lee had passed these orders to the police and fire chiefs, thereby directly participating in the suppression of the media and aiding the rebellion. As Hankyoreh described, this included a phone call to former Police Commissioner Cho Ji-ho to check on the blockade of the National Assembly, followed by a call to Fire Commissioner Heo Seok-gon instructing compliance with the police’s requests for power and water cuts.
While the court recognized Lee’s guilt in participating in important duties in a rebellion and in committing perjury—having falsely testified in 2025 that he neither received nor relayed such orders—it acquitted him of abuse of authority, citing insufficient evidence. Judge Ryu’s statement, as reported by multiple outlets, emphasized, “There is no proof of the crime in the abuse of authority charge.” Nevertheless, the court’s findings on the core charges were unequivocal.
In the end, Lee was sentenced to seven years in prison. This sentence, while less than the 15 years sought by prosecutors, was still a significant judgment, reflecting the seriousness with which the judiciary views both the events of December 3 and the subsequent attempts to obscure the truth. The verdict, as Goodmorning Chungcheong noted, follows closely on the heels of the guilty verdict for former Prime Minister Han Deok-soo, suggesting a firm legal stance on the culpability of top officials in the rebellion. The ruling is expected to influence upcoming trials, including those of former President Yoon Seok-youl, former Defense Minister Kim Yong-hyun, and former Justice Minister Park Sung-jae.
The trial’s public nature and the detailed examination of evidence—especially the use of CCTV footage—highlighted both the strengths and limitations of modern legal proceedings. The court acknowledged that the lack of audio in the CCTV recordings limited their evidentiary value but still found the visual evidence compelling when combined with witness testimony and other documentation. As YTN pointed out, the court’s approach in Lee’s case closely mirrored its handling of the Han Deok-soo trial, where the martial law was plainly labeled a rebellion and the suppression of constitutional order was cited as the primary motive.
The broader context of these trials cannot be ignored. The December 3, 2024, martial law, now widely referred to as the “12·3 Rebellion,” involved the deployment of military forces to suppress the National Assembly and the National Election Commission, along with warrantless searches—actions the courts have deemed a direct assault on the nation’s constitutional order. The coordinated efforts to cut off media access were seen as an integral part of this plan.
As South Korea moves forward, the sentencing of Lee Sang-min marks another chapter in the country’s ongoing efforts to address the legacy of the 12·3 Rebellion. The outcome sends a clear message about the rule of law and the accountability of public officials, particularly in moments of national crisis. With further high-profile verdicts on the horizon, the nation—and the world—will be watching to see how justice continues to unfold.