Handwritten memos emerge as controversial evidence in impeachment case

Noh Sang-won, former commander of the Defense Intelligence Command, is being transferred to prosecutors from the Seoul Seobu Police Station in Eunpyeong District, Dec. 24, on charges of involvement in planning the Dec. 3 martial law declaration. Yonhap

A notebook belonging to a former chief of the Defense Intelligence Command (DIC) and a memo from a former senior official of the National Intelligence Service (NIS) have become central to the prosecution and court rulings regarding President Yoon Suk Yeol's martial law imposition, sparking debate over whether they should be considered crucial evidence in his impeachment trial.

A note belonging to former DIC Commander Noh Sang-won contained the names of numerous lawmakers and public figures, including former President Moon Jae-in and Rep. Lee Jun-seok of the Reform Party, alongside alarming phrases such as "removal."

Noh has been accused of wielding unofficial influence and is suspected of drafting Yoon’s martial law decree on Dec. 3.

During the investigation, Noh did not offer a clear explanation about the details or circumstances under which he wrote the note.

Since it was not determined whether the content reflected his personal thoughts or the circumstances surrounding the imposition of martial law, it was excluded from the prosecution’s indictment.

Hong Jang-won, former first deputy director of the National Intelligence Service, testifies as a witness during the fifth hearing of President Yoon Suk Yeol’s impeachment trial at the Constitutional Court in Jongno District, Seoul, Feb. 4. Courtesy of Constitutional Court

A memo from Hong Jang-won, former first deputy director of the NIS, listing politicians to be arrested under instructions from Yeo In-hyung, former head of the Defense Counterintelligence Command, is also gaining attention in the ongoing impeachment trial of the president at the Constitutional Court.

Reportedly, the memo contains the names of over 10 individuals, including the opposition party leader and journalists.

On Feb. 4, Hong testified in court that he received direct orders from Yoon to arrest politicians. He further provided details about the memo’s creation, explaining that he wrote down the names based on instructions from Yeo.

However, NIS Director Cho Tae-yong’s testimony during the latest hearing on Thursday cast doubt on Hong's claims, prolonging the ongoing debate over the veracity of the allegations.

Written evidence, such as notes and memos, can carry significant weight, but they are often subject to scrutiny before being recognized as admissible evidence.

The impact of these records will depend on their admissibility and probative value. If accepted, they could serve as crucial material in determining guilt or innocence.

However, the content of Noh’s note is fragmented, making it difficult to consider it as conclusive evidence without his testimony.

After securing the note, police requested a handwriting analysis from the National Forensic Service, but it was deemed unfit for evaluation. As a result, Noh's testimony regarding his possession of the note and the circumstances surrounding its creation remains critical.

There have been previous cases where written evidence garnered significant attention.

In a 2017 impeachment ruling involving former President Park Geun-hye and her confidant Choi Soon-sil, who were at the center of an influence-peddling scandal, such evidence was partially admitted. Choi was accused of using her relationship with the president to manipulate government decisions for personal gain.