Seoul, June 16 Former South Korean Defence Minister Kim Yong-hyun, who has been detained on charges of insurrection over his alleged role in the December 3 martial law imposition, filed an appeal on Monday to cancel a court decision granting him bail.
Earlier in the day, the Seoul Central District Court accepted the prosecution's request for Kim's bail despite an objection from Kim's side, with just 10 days left until Kim's detention period was set to expire.
Kim was arrested December 27 for recommending martial law to former South Korean President Yoon Suk Yeol and drafting the decree. He is accused of deploying troops from various units to the National Assembly during martial law to prevent lawmakers from voting to reject Yoon's martial law declaration.
Kim's legal team filed for the appeal and requested a stay order to suspend the court decision, arguing the move effectively extends the detention of their client, who was soon to be released.
"It is not a decision to release but merely a means to illegally extend the state of detention that Kim is in," the team said.
"This is an unconstitutional measure that artificially restricts the basic rights of the defendant and unfairly limits his freedom of action."
The court set bail at 100 million won ($73,400) and imposed conditions that, among others, ban him from meeting or communicating with Yoon and others related to the martial law case, Yonhap news agency reported.
Usually, bail is requested by the defendants. In this case, however, the bail request was made by the prosecution.
Kim's six-month statutory detention period was set to expire June 26, which means he was supposed to be freed only 10 days later without any restrictions.
Kim's objection to the bail was overridden by the court, which apparently seeks to block any unexpected variables that may arise during the ongoing martial law-related trials.
Kim had earlier filed for bail about a month after his arrest, but the Seoul Central District Court did not accept the request at the time. He then appealed that decision, which was turned down by the Seoul High Court.
Disclaimer: This post has been auto-published from an agency feed without any modifications to the text and has not been reviewed by an editor