Former Ground Operations Command chief Kang Ho-pil leaves the Seoul Central District Court in Seocho-gu, Seoul, on the 13th after undergoing a pre-detention questioning over allegations of involvement in insurrection. Reporter Jo Tae-hyung - Seoul Economic Daily Society News from South KoreaFormer Ground Operations Command chief Kang Ho-pil leaves the Seoul Central District Court in Seocho-gu, Seoul, on the 13th after undergoing a pre-detention questioning over allegations of involvement in insurrection. Reporter Jo Tae-hyung

Kang Ho-pil, former commander of the Army’s Ground Operations Command, has avoided arrest despite allegations that he took part in insurrection related to the Dec. 3 martial law declaration.

According to legal circles on the 14th, Lee Jong-rok, a senior judge in charge of insurrection warrants at the Seoul Central District Court, rejected the warrant after conducting a pre-detention questioning the previous day of Kang, who faces charges of playing a key role in an insurrection. “There is room for dispute over the criminal charges, and in light of the investigation’s progress, it is difficult to see a risk of evidence destruction or flight,” Judge Lee said.

Kang is accused of ordering the establishment of an internal situation room at the Ground Operations Command, as well as the mobilization of a crisis response team and all command officers, following the Dec. 3 martial law declaration. The Ground Operations Command, which Kang led at the time, was found to have summoned its crisis response team through a voice mass-notification system at around 10:36 p.m. on Dec. 3, 2024, shortly after former President Yoon Suk-yeol declared martial law. The special counsel team applied the charge of playing a key role in an insurrection, viewing that Kang converted the Ground Operations Command into a “martial law response system” and thereby participated in the martial law.

Kang also faces suspicions that he took part in related discussions before the martial law was carried out. Yeo In-hyung, former commander of the Defense Counterintelligence Command, referred to the commanders of the Ground Operations Command, the Special Warfare Command, the Capital Defense Command, and the Counterintelligence Command by an abbreviation, “JTSB,” and wrote memos including “This is the common opinion of JTSB,” “The four are prepared,” and “The enemy’s action comes first. A wartime situation or a situation that cannot be controlled by police force must come.” Aside from Kang, former Special Warfare Command chief Kwak Jong-keun, former Capital Defense Command chief Lee Jin-woo, and former Counterintelligence Command chief Yeo In-hyung are all already standing trial on charges of playing key roles in an insurrection.

Kang is reported to have denied all the raised suspicions during the warrant hearing that day. The gist of his position is that he was not aware of the martial law in advance and was not involved in carrying it out. Kang is reported to have told the insurrection special counsel that after accompanying former President Yoon on his July 2024 trip to Hawaii, he objected to remarks about “troop mobilization” made by Yoon and then-Presidential Security Service chief Kim Yong-hyun, saying, “They are trying to drag the military into politics,” and expressed his intention to leave the service.

Earlier, the insurrection special counsel team led by Cho Eun-suk, which investigated the martial law, excluded Kang from indictment, judging that there was no evidence that the Ground Operations Command actually deployed troops or carried out specific missions. In the special counsel’s investigation, former commander Yeo also stated that “Kang came in with a resignation application last summer and opposed the martial law.”

The special counsel team, which has already extended its investigation period twice, has requested the National Assembly to revise the law for a “third extension” ahead of the end of its investigation period on the 24th. However, with the warrant filed near the end of the investigation period again rejected by the court, skepticism over the need for a further extension is expected to gain force. The comprehensive special counsel team, which launched its investigation in February this year, has requested arrest warrants for 15 people over more than four months, of whom warrants were issued for only six.