The Seoul Central District Court has determined that the actions of former Interior Minister Lee Sang-min, directing specific media outlets to face utility cuts, fall under the category of rebellion aimed at violating constitutional order. This judgment reflects concerns that such measures not only constituted direct plans towards rebellion but also served as means to suppress dissenting media critical of the government, thereby facilitating schemes to strengthen the rebellion itself. The court emphasized that exercising physical coercion against critical press undermines public criticism of rebellion, potentially solidifying the outcomes that such rebellion intends to achieve.

During the emergency martial law period, Lee was accused of instructing authorities like the Fire Service to enforce utility cuts against media organizations including The Hankyoreh. Additionally, he is facing charges for providing false testimony during the impeachment trial of former President Yoon Seok-youl, where he denied having given such instructions and claimed he did not relay any information to relevant agencies. This ruling sheds light on the ongoing legal and political challenges concerning freedom of the press in South Korea and raises questions about accountability for those in positions of power during politically sensitive times.

This decision by the court not only implicates Lee in direct rebellion-related offenses but also raises broader concerns regarding governmental actions that may intimidate or control the media narrative. As South Korea navigates its commitments to democratic principles and civil liberties, the implications of this case could resonate throughout the landscape of political discourse and media operations, particularly for those outlets that challenge the ruling powers under precarious circumstances like martial law.