Can citizens win damages for psychological harm from Yoon's martial law imposition?

Myeongdong Street in Seoul appears quiet, Monday, as consumer sentiment weakens ahead of the year-end amid the economic downturn and the martial law crisis. Yonhap

Over 10,000 citizens are pursuing a class action damages lawsuit against President Yoon Suk Yeol, seeking compensation, saying Yoon caused psychological harm by declaring unlawful martial law that restricted their fundamental rights.

According to the Preparatory Group for Compensation Lawsuit Against Yoon Suk Yeol for Treason, approximately 10,000 citizens have expressed their intent to participate in the compensation lawsuit against Yoon.

The group was organized by lawyer Lee Geum-gyu, who served as the National Assembly’s representative during the impeachment trial of former President Park Geun-hye. The lawsuit alleges that Yoon failed in his duty to protect citizens' rights to life and liberty, causing psychological damage.

On Wednesday, 105 plaintiffs initially filed a lawsuit at the Seoul Central District Court, seeking 100,000 won ($75) each.

Legal precedent from Park Geun-hye case

A similar damages lawsuit was filed against former President Park Geun-hye following her impeachment over the corruption scandal. The plaintiffs said that Park’s violations of the Constitution and laws caused them significant harm, but the case was dismissed.

While the court acknowledged Park’s unlawful actions, it said, "The president bears political responsibility but does not hold legal liability to individual citizens."

This legal principle was rooted in a Supreme Court precedent from the 1970s, during authoritarian Park Chung-hee’s presidency, when emergency measure lawsuits were dismissed on the grounds that the president's actions were only politically accountable.

However, in 2022, the Supreme Court overturned this precedent. It ruled that emergency measures violated individual citizens' constitutional rights and that the state must compensate affected individuals. This shift has given hope to plaintiffs in the case against Yoon.

Lawyer Choi Jeong-gyu of law firm Wongok said, "The revised precedent broadens the scope of accountability for the president or state toward citizens, potentially making it easier to hold Yoon accountable."

A restaurant in Jongno, Seoul, displays a holiday reservation notice on Monday amid reports of a severe business slump among the self-employed due to the martial law and impeachment crisis. Yonhap

Challenges in proving damages

Nonetheless, many legal experts believe the plaintiffs face an uphill battle. To win, they must prove two key points: first, that Yoon’s imposition of martial law was unlawful, and second, that citizens suffered direct and measurable harm.

While former lawmakers or aides involved during the martial law period may present stronger cases, proving psychological harm to the general public is considered more difficult.

A judge at a court in the Seoul metropolitan area said, "If plaintiffs cannot provide evidence beyond simply claiming psychological shock, it will be challenging to win. Recognizing harm for all citizens may also pose practical and legal stability issues."

The 1970s emergency measure lawsuits involved plaintiffs who experienced direct harm, such as detention or imprisonment, whereas the damages alleged in this case are less direct and occurred over a significantly shorter period.

The lawsuit against Yoon is expected to gain momentum after the conclusion of his impeachment trial and related criminal proceedings, as evidence collected in criminal trials is often easier to use in civil cases.

A senior judge said, "Even if President Yoon is acquitted, proving civil liability for unlawful actions is a separate matter. Regardless of the outcome, the case holds significance in questioning the extent of a leader’s responsibility."

This article from the Hankook Ilbo, a sister publication of The Korea Times, is translated by a generative AI and edited by The Korea Times.