The key facts

  • The Seoul Appeals Court upheld the verdict: 18 months in prison, suspended for three years, for false statements in the 2022 campaign
  • If the election is annulled, the People Power Party must return 39.7 billion won ($29.6 million)
  • Yoon's defense announced its intention to appeal to the Supreme Court

Appeal upholds verdict in election law violation case

The Seoul Appeals Court on Wednesday upheld the lower court's decision sentencing suspended South Korean President Yoon Suk Yeol to 18 months in prison, suspended for three years, for making false statements during his presidential campaign, Yonhap News Agency reports, citing the agency's message Anadolu. The court found that Yoon falsely denied having introduced a lawyer to a former tax official at a press event in December 2021, and also made false statements about his ties to shaman Jeon Seong-bae in an interview in January 2022. In the court's view, these statements violated voters' right to make an informed choice and undermined the fairness of the election.

What the verdict means for the election outcome and campaign financing

If the verdict becomes final, Yoon's 2022 election as president will be annulled, and his People Power Party (PPP) will be required to return 39.7 billion won (about $29.6 million) in state funds that compensated campaign expenses. Under South Korean election law, a party must return the compensated funds if its candidate receives a final prison sentence or a fine exceeding 1 million won for violating election rules; such sanctions also annul the candidate's election. Yoon's lawyers said they would appeal the decision to the Supreme Court, so the verdict has not yet become final.

Parallel martial law case

Separately, proceedings continue over the events of December 2024: Yoon, suspended from office after the failed imposition of martial law, was sentenced to life imprisonment in February for leading an insurrection; that verdict is under appeal. Thus, the question of the fate of the 2022 mandate and the return of funds is being decided independently of that case and depends on the outcome of the appeal against the election-case verdict in the Supreme Court.