Hong Cheol-ho, the former chief of political affairs in the presidential office, provided testimony in court regarding the reasons behind the delay of a public address on the day following the declaration of martial law on December 3. He emphasized that former President Yoon Seok-yeol had aimed to justify the necessity of the martial law, while the presidential office was more inclined toward addressing the public with apologies. This discrepancy in priorities led to confusion and resulted in an absence of timely communication from the presidential office.

In his testimony, Hong recounted that there were discussions among the presidential office about the type of address that should be made, with some officials advocating for a stronger statement than just an apology. He recalled that this sentiment was even expressed by representatives from the National Assembly who were present. This illustrates the tensions within the office regarding how to handle the public reaction to the martial law and highlights the communication breakdown between different parties involved.

Further questioning revealed the complexities and challenges that the presidential staff faced in aligning their messaging with the expectations of the president. Hong admitted that while it was clear that a presidential address was needed to explain the martial law, the alignment between President Yoon's perspective and the operational staff's views did not fully coincide, leading to the delay in the address. The court proceedings also revolved around the broader implications of the past political decisions under scrutiny, including the appointment of constitutional court justices by former Prime Minister Han Duck-soo, enhancing the narrative of political discord at the highest levels of government.