1

The contrasting outcomes of the impeachment trials of former South Korean Presidents Roh Moo-hyun and Park Geun-hye underscore the significance of assessing whether the president committed a "grave violation of law" and demonstrated a "will to uphold the Constitution."

​

In the 2004 impeachment trial of President Roh Moo-hyun, the Constitutional Court acknowledged his violation of the Public Official Election Act by making politically biased remarks ahead of the general elections. However, the court concluded that this breach was not severe enough to warrant his removal from office, stating that it did not constitute a grave violation that betrayed public trust.

​

Conversely, in the 2017 impeachment of President Park Geun-hye, the court found that her actions—allowing an unelected confidante, Choi Soon-sil, to interfere in state affairs—amounted to a profound betrayal of public trust and a significant violation of the Constitution. The court emphasized that President Park's lack of commitment to constitutional principles justified her removal from office.

​

These precedents suggest that in any future impeachment proceedings, such as those involving President Yoon, the Constitutional Court is likely to focus on whether the president's actions constitute a grave violation of the law and whether there is a demonstrable commitment to upholding the Constitution. Legal experts note that these assessments are inherently subjective and may lead to contentious debates and significant political repercussions.