Home > Opinion > Columns

A president deep in drink during danger?

Published: 07 Nov. 2025, 00:02

Kang Ju-an

The author is an editorial writer at the JoongAng Ilbo.

As the first anniversary of the Dec. 3 martial law crisis approaches, a series of revelations has emerged. Former President Yoon Suk Yeol, who had refused to comply with the special counsel’s summons or appear in court after being detained for the second time in July, has begun speaking from his solitary cell at the Seoul Detention Center. He appeared before the special counsel investigating insurrection on Oct. 15 and again at his trial at the Seoul Central District Court on Oct. 31.

Former President Yoon Suk Yeol appears at the Seoul Central District Court in Seocho District, Seoul, on Sept. 26 for the first hearing on charges including obstruction of official duties and abuse of power. [Joint Press Corps]

His sudden change in behavior has prompted several interpretations. His aides claimed he complied to ease the burden on prison officials. Critics argue this is unconvincing, noting that Yoon resisted previous arrest attempts at his Hannam-dong residence and even blocked investigators from executing a court-approved warrant.

Some believe that after months in solitary confinement, Yoon may have simply wanted temporary relief from being trapped inside his prison walls. But many analysts say this shift was triggered by a calculated move from the special counsel team led by Cho Eun-seok. They obtained an arrest warrant but kept it confidential, learning from past failed attempts where advance notice allowed resistance. Faced with the possibility of being dragged out early in the morning in a prison uniform, Yoon may have chosen to walk into court on his own terms.

What followed shocked the public. On Nov. 3, former Special Warfare Commander Kwak Jong-geun testified that Yoon told him, “Bring me Han Dong-hoon. I will shoot him if I have to.” When prosecutors referred to “Kim Keon Hee at the time,” Yoon objected, saying, “You should address her as Madam Kim Keon Hee.” Days later, Kim Keon Hee admitted through her lawyer that she accepted two Chanel bags. Whether Yoon was aware remains unclear.

More striking was Yoon’s own admission of heavy drinking. In court, questioning Kwak, he said, “You know we drank several times. I usually made the first bomb shot, and we took turns.” Recalling drinks at the defense minister’s residence, he added, “It was more than twice. We drank a lot, right?” Kwak replied they typically consumed 10 to 20 glasses.

Yoon appeared to stress excessive drinking to refute claims that discussions about emergency powers were made during those gatherings. Yet the idea that the commander in chief, defense minister and elite military leaders regularly drank to excess — confirmed by Yoon himself — raises a deeper question: who was safeguarding the country during those hours?

This was not the first allegation of such behavior. In May, former Capital Defense Commander Lee Jin-woo testified before the Constitutional Court that Yoon “drank quickly, became intoxicated and was helped out by former Minister Kim Yong-hyun.” Yoon also told Kwak in court that at a dinner marking Armed Forces Day, “I arrived after 8 p.m., and as soon as I sat down, we started passing around soju and beer bombs. A lot of glasses went around.”

Former Army Special Warfare Commander Kwak Jong-geun appears as a witness at former President Yoon Suk Yeol’s insurrection trial at the Seoul Central District Court in Seocho District, Seoul, on Nov. 3. Kwak testified that in October last year, Yoon pointed to former People Power Party chief Han Dong-hoon and others and said, “Bring him in. I will shoot him if I have to,” a claim Yoon’s legal team immediately denied. [Seoul Central District Court]

The sinking of the Cheonan naval vessel by a North Korean torpedo occurred at 9:22 p.m. on March 26, 2010. Critics now ask: if a similar attack had occurred on a night when the president “started drinking at 8 p.m.” and “many glasses were passed around,” what might have happened? The fact that such a scenario was suggested not by political opponents but by a former president himself has amplified public unease.

The writer argues that in a country where laws are often revised for far lesser matters, perhaps the National Assembly should consider a presidential prohibition law to ensure national security. Without such measures, the author claims, it may be impossible for citizens to sleep in peace.

This article was originally written in Korean and translated by a bilingual reporter with the help of generative AI tools. It was then edited by a native English-speaking editor. All AI-assisted translations are reviewed and refined by our newsroom.