Why Yoon is accused of insurrection, not treason

It’s certainly not ideal, but “naeran” has nonetheless been dominating the Korean news for months. “Naeran” was the original basis of the impeachment bill passed against President Yoon Suk Yeol on Dec. 14, 2024, in the wake of his shock martial law declaration, which will be decided upon today.

It was the only charge against Yoon in his recent criminal prosecution, as well as a key aspect of a special counsel probe the opposition repeatedly tried to launch. Look the word up in a Korean-English dictionary and the first entry you are likely to find is “treason,” but dig deeper and there are other translations: rebellion, civil war, insurrection. One unfortunate Naver Dictionary entry lists “intestine war” — something many of us might be guilty of, but which we can safely assume doesn’t apply here.



So which to use? The official English version of South Korea’s Constitution says in Article 84: “The President shall not be charged with a criminal offense during his tenure of office except for insurrection or treason.” It translates “oehwan” as treason and “naeran” as insurrection. The Criminal Act that provides the starting point for criminal law in Korea also translates “naeran” as insurrection.

There is no entry for treason. However, “oehwan” is listed as a set of offenses under “crimes concerning foreign aggression,” all of which involve providing aid to foreign enemies. In both cases, the government translation of the charge against Yoon is insurrection.

There are similarities here to recent events in the United States, Article 3 in the constitution of which limits the definition of treason to levying war against the US and aiding its enemies. As such, those involved in the Jan. 6, 2021, Capitol riots were charged with insurrection, not treason.

At one point, the Democratic Party of Korea sought to pursue treason charges against Yoon on top of the insurrection charge. In a special counsel bill in January, the party alleged Yoon and his administration conspired to provoke North Korea into attacking the South. One legal scholar said the argument was hard to make because it was hard to see how provocation would amount to collaborating with a foreign power.

“If you look at the Criminal Code, treason is when you benefit or work with a foreign government. Saying Yoon or our military catered to North Korea is a stretch, to say the least,” the scholar, a former legal adviser to the Democratic Party, told The Korea Herald in January. The accusation of treason was eventually dropped from the bill.

.