The court's decision was made to temporarily suspend the effect of the order to remove Prosecutor General Yoon Seok-yeol from his duties.
According to law enforcement officials on the 1st, the 4th administrative division of the Seoul Administrative Court (Deputy Judge Cho Mi-yeon) cited a partial request for suspension of execution that was filed by President Yoon in opposition to Justice Minister Chu Mi-ae's order to exclude duties.
Accordingly, the order for exclusion of duties against President Yun will become ineffective until 30 days after the decision of the lawsuit for canceling the disposition of suspension of duties, which is the main lawsuit filed by President Yoon, is issued.
General Yoon requested that the original lawsuit be suspended until the decision is finalized, but the court decided to suspend it for only one month after the decision (first trial) was issued.
Considering the fact that exclusion from job is a temporary disposition and that it takes several months for the main decision to come out, it can be considered that job exclusion has been lifted with this decision by the court.
Upon hearing the news that the suspension was decided, President Yoon headed to the Supreme Prosecutors' Office right away.
Earlier, on the 24th of last month, Minister Chu said that a total of six charges were revealed as a result of the inspection on the 24th of last month.
As a result, President Yoon filed a lawsuit for canceling the job exclusion on the 25th of last month, after filing for a suspension of execution on the 25th of last month, saying that all charges were different from the facts and that he did not get an opportunity to clarify his position during the inspection process.
In an interrogation held in the court the previous day, Yoon argued that the suspension of duty violates the political neutrality and independence of the prosecutors, and that it should be suspended immediately.
Accordingly, Minister Chu requested the court to dismiss the suspension of execution, saying that the damage to the prosecution's neutrality could not be regarded as'irrecoverable damage' protected by the law.