Former President Yoon Suk-yeol (center) arrives at the Seoul Central District Court in Seocho-gu, Seoul, on June 9 to attend the sixth hearing in his trial on charges including leading an insurrection. / Joint Press Corps

Police have summoned former President Yoon Suk-yeol to appear for questioning as a criminal suspect on June 12. After he failed to respond to the first summons issued on June 5, a second notice was sent. Typically, if a suspect fails to comply with three consecutive summonses, police may request an arrest warrant. Authorities have also secured records showing that Yoon made secret phone calls to military and police leaders shortly after declaring martial law in December last year.

At a regular press briefing held on June 9 at the National Office of Investigation, the police's special investigation team said, “We sent a first summons notice to former President Yoon on May 27, requesting his appearance on June 5, but he did not comply.” A spokesperson for the special team added, “Close to the scheduled date, Yoon’s legal counsel informed us that he would not be able to attend. Therefore, we issued a second summons on June 5, asking him to appear for questioning on June 12.” Yoon’s side reportedly did not provide a specific reason for the noncompliance.

Yoon is currently under investigation for obstruction of official duties, after allegedly interfering with the execution of an arrest warrant by the Corruption Investigation Office for High-ranking Officials (CIO) and the police in January. He also faces charges of instructing former Deputy Chief of Presidential Security Service Kim Sung-hoon to delete call records of his secure phone with military leaders, in violation of the Presidential Security Act. This is reportedly the first time in Korean history that a former president has been summoned by police as a criminal suspect.

The police's special investigation team confirmed that Yoon made secret phone calls to top military and police officials following the declaration of martial law. “We verified that Yoon personally called the commanders of the military, the Commissioner General of the National Police Agency, and the Chief of the Seoul Metropolitan Police Agency,” said an official from the team. When asked whether these calls occurred before the National Assembly voted to repeal the martial law order, the official replied, “That would be an accurate interpretation.”

This information was obtained through the analysis of secure phone server records voluntarily submitted by the Presidential Security Service. While previous testimonies suggested that Yoon had contacted military and police leaders at the time of his declaration of martial law, this is the first time that call records have been identified to support this claim.

The individuals Yoon is confirmed to have contacted include then-Capital Defense Commander Lee Jin-woo, Defense Security Commander Yeo In-hyung, Special Warfare Commander Kwak Jong-geun, National Police Commissioner General Cho Ji-ho, and Seoul Police Chief Kim Bong-sik. These individuals are currently on trial for allegedly mobilizing troops to block the National Assembly from passing a resolution to lift martial law, attempting to arrest lawmakers, and deploying police riot units to prevent their access to the National Assembly.

The police's special investigation team also confirmed that a secure phone was delivered to Noh Sang-won, the former commander of the Defense Intelligence Command, who was a civilian at the time. Records show that the user information for the device was deleted on December 5, 2023. Investigators are currently examining how Noh came into possession of the secure phone.

The special investigation team refuted claims made by former Deputy Chief Kim and others that it deleted the user information of secure phones in accordance with security regulations. “We believe there was awareness within the Presidential Security Service that the secure phone calls posed a problem,” said an official from the investigation team. “Given that awareness, the argument that the deletion was simply part of standard security protocol is difficult to accept from a common-sense perspective.”