People Power Party Chair Fined for Making False Military Service Claims

South Korea’s ruling party chairman Han Dong-hoon has been ordered to pay a significant fine after a court found him guilty of making false claims about his military service during last year’s parliamentary election campaign.

The Seoul Central District Court imposed a 1.5 million won (approximately $1,100) fine on Han, who leads the conservative People Power Party, for violating the Public Official Election Act. The ruling comes after prosecutors charged Han with deliberately misleading voters about his military experience during a televised debate in April 2023.

During the debate, which was part of a by-election campaign for Seoul’s Gangseo District, Han claimed he had completed his mandatory military service as an assistant judge advocate in the Navy. However, investigators determined that Han had actually served in the Army’s Judge Advocate General’s Corps, not the Navy as he had stated.

The court rejected Han’s defense that the misstatement was an innocent error made during the heat of a live debate. “The defendant made false statements about easily verifiable facts regarding his military service,” the court stated in its ruling. “This constitutes an intentional act to spread false information about a candidate’s background.”

South Korea maintains a strict mandatory military service requirement for all able-bodied men, typically lasting between 18-21 months depending on the branch of service. Military records are considered significant in South Korean politics and public life, with candidates’ service records often scrutinized during elections.

The case has attracted considerable attention in South Korea, where military service is deeply embedded in the national identity and remains a sensitive topic in political discourse. False claims about military service are taken particularly seriously, as they touch on issues of patriotism and duty that many South Korean voters hold in high regard.

Han, 51, assumed leadership of the People Power Party in 2023 after building his reputation as a prosecutor known for handling high-profile corruption cases. He is widely considered a potential presidential candidate for the 2027 election and has been a close ally of current President Yoon Suk Yeol.

Political analysts suggest this ruling could impact Han’s political trajectory and the ruling party’s standing ahead of the upcoming general election in April. The People Power Party has been working to maintain public support amid various domestic challenges, including economic concerns and diplomatic tensions with North Korea.

“This ruling comes at a sensitive time for both Han personally and the ruling party as a whole,” said Park Min-jung, a political science professor at Seoul National University. “While the fine itself is relatively small, the symbolic damage of being convicted of election law violations could resonate with voters who expect transparency from their leaders.”

The People Power Party released a statement expressing disappointment with the ruling, suggesting Han would consider appealing the decision. “Chairman Han has consistently maintained that his statement was an unintentional slip of the tongue during a live debate, not a deliberate attempt to deceive voters,” the statement read.

Opposition parties, including the Democratic Party of Korea, have called for Han to take responsibility for the conviction, with some lawmakers suggesting he should step down from his leadership position.

The conviction adds to ongoing political tensions in South Korea’s polarized political landscape, where the ruling conservative party and liberal opposition have engaged in heated confrontations over policy direction and ethics investigations.

Legal experts note that under South Korean election law, a fine exceeding 1 million won for election violations can result in the loss of eligibility to run for public office for five years. However, this particular ruling does not appear to immediately threaten Han’s political eligibility, as additional legal processes would be required.

The case highlights the intense scrutiny faced by political figures in South Korea and underscores the importance placed on transparency regarding personal backgrounds, particularly military service records, in the country’s political culture.