liberties. In its verdict, the court emphasized that no leader, regardless of office, is above the law. “The defendant’s actions represented a grave violation of constitutional order and public trust,” the presiding judge said during sentencing. Yoon, who denied wrongdoing throughout the trial, argued that the decree was necessary to maintain national stability amid escalating security concerns. His legal team maintained that the measures were temporary and aimed at preventing chaos, not consolidating power. The court rejected those arguments, citing evidence that the move bypassed democratic oversight and improperly involved security forces in civilian governance. The case has deeply polarized South Korean society. Supporters of the former president condemned the ruling as politically motivated, while critics hailed it as a victory for the rule of law and democratic accountability. Outside the courthouse, small groups of protesters gathered, reflecting the sharp divisions that have persisted since Yoon left office. Political analysts say the verdict sends a strong signal about the limits of executive power in South Korea, a nation shaped by past struggles against authoritarian rule. “This ruling reinforces the principle that emergency powers cannot be used as a political tool,” said one constitutional law expert in Seoul. Yoon’s conviction marks one of the most significant legal judgments against a former South Korean leader in recent years, adding to the country’s history of prosecuting ex-presidents for abuses of power. The former president has the right to appeal, and his legal team indicated they plan to challenge the verdict in higher courts. Source: Associated Press (AP)