
SEOUL — In a historic move, South Korea’s National Assembly has impeached President Yoon Suk Yeol following his recent attempt to impose martial law, marking the first such measure in over four decades. The impeachment vote passed with a significant majority of 204 to 85 in the 300-member assembly, with several lawmakers from the ruling party joining the opposition in the decision.
The impeachment comes just days after a previous attempt failed to gain traction, as ruling People Power Party lawmakers boycotted the vote last Saturday. Following the impeachment, large crowds of protesters gathered outside the National Assembly and across the nation, celebrating the decision and waving light sticks reminiscent of K-pop concerts.
With Yoon’s presidential duties suspended, Prime Minister Han Duck-sool will serve as Acting Prime Minister. The Constitutional Court now has 180 days to rule on Yoon’s impeachment. If upheld, a new presidential election must be held within 60 days.
Acting Chief Justice Moon Hyung-bae assured the public that the court would conduct a “speedy and fair trial.” In a recorded message from his residence, Yoon expressed his commitment to the nation despite the impeachment, stating, “Although I am pausing for now, my journey for the future with the people over the past two and a half years shouldn’t stop.”

Opposition Democratic Party leader Lee Jae-myung celebrated the impeachment as a testament to the people’s power, claiming it as a victory in a long struggle. However, Yoon has vowed to “fight to the end,” defending his actions as necessary for governance and accusing opposition lawmakers of colluding with North Korea to paralyze the government.
Yoon’s rationale for declaring martial law began to falter as his supporters distanced themselves from him, with some facing arrest or suspension. The opposition accused Yoon’s administration of jeopardizing South Korea’s geopolitical standing through its “pro-Japan stance” and alienating key nations like North Korea, China, and Russia, which they argued compromised the nation’s security.
Local media reports indicate that U.S. officials inquired about the impeachment motion’s language, particularly regarding its implications for U.S. foreign policy achievements in the region. This contentious language was subsequently removed from the second impeachment bill.