By Jong-Gun Jo, Executive Director, Korean Civil Society Design
In England, there is Shakespeare; in the United States, Walt Whitman; in Spain, Cervantes; and in Germany, Goethe. Among these literary giants noted by 19th-century historian Thomas Carlyle, I want to focus particularly on Goethe. Johann Wolfgang von Goethe(1749–1832) was fascinated by the legend of Faust, a distinctive scholar of the 16th century. Over a span of 58 years—from 1773 until just eight months before his death in 1832—Goethe completed Faust, his life’s magnum opus. In Part II of Faust, known as “The Tragedy of the Ruler,” Faust receives a vast expanse of land from the Emperor as a reward for his service in war and embarks on an ambitious land reclamation project. Despite enjoying every imaginable luxury, Faust remains unsatisfied. His final ambition becomes the conquest of nature itself—an effort to assert his “dominion over the earth.” He constructs dikes to hold back the sea and create new land.
But Faust’s character becomes deeply troubling when, in his unrelenting pursuit of ambition, he sacrifices innocent lives. He mercilessly exploits the people’s labor for his massive construction projects. In one pivotal moment, he orders Mephistopheles to remove an elderly couple whose cottage stands in the way. Mephistopheles’ henchmen forcibly evict them and burn their home to the ground. The couple perishes in the flames. This scene exposes the ruthless greed of a ruler who pursues power at the expense of the weak. “On the wide sea, man feels unbound; the spirit, too, grows free and bold. Why trouble then with judgment or with counsel? … War, trade, and piracy are inseparable.” “Auf freier See, da wird der Geist gelöst, Was zögert ihr? Was zaudert ihr? Entschlossen! Krieg, Handel und Piraterie, Dreieinig sind sie, nicht zu trennen.” in Goethe, Faust II, Akt IV) This confession from Mephistopheles, who circled the globe under Faust’s command, plundering and amassing wealth, reflects the very greed that Goethe feared.
Who would Faust and the people around him in this “tragedy of the ruler” be in today’s context? Particularly in the context of the impeachment proceedings against President Yoon Suk Yeol over the December 3 Martial Law crisis, who stands in these roles? Among many figures of this time, if we were to record two in history alongside Yoon Suk-yeol, who would they be? Judge Ji Gui-hyun, who arbitrarily replaced “daily” time calculation under Article 203 of the Criminal Procedure Act with “hourly” units to cancel Yoon’s detention; and Prosecutor General Shim Woo-jung, who astonishingly abandoned a constitutionally guaranteed immediate appeal(Articles 403(1), 402, 405, and 66 of the Criminal Procedure Act), based on the unfounded claim that it may violate the constitution. These two figures have turned the judiciary and prosecution into laughingstocks, damaging the honor and dignity of judges and prosecutors alike. And President Yoon Suk Yeol, who dragged the nation to the edge—He is like the “satanic mill” that Karl Polanyi mentions in The Great Transformation(Korean edition, pp. 163, 175, 244), grinding down ‘the common sense’ that forms the foundation of society.
Let us examine Yoon Suk-yeol's insatiable thirst for power and his constant lies. First, it is his unquenchable greed for authority—he is never satisfied with the power he already has. Let us look at a series of incidents that reveal how he was not content with merely holding the presidency. During the presidential campaign, there was the controversy over the 王 (king in Mandarin Chinese) character written on his palm. He showed an odd indifference toward public opinion. He ousted the ruling party’s leader, emphasized the rule of law yet made exceptions for his own family and loyalists, appointed figures contrary to public sentiment, and was suspected of intervening in brutal investigations against opposition leaders. He recklessly treated an the key opposition leader as a criminal, issued gag orders, evaded responsibility during the impeachment trial, incited mob behavior at the Western District Court in Seoul, and even imposed martial law with guns pointed at the people. We must ask—did he not wish to become a king himself?
Second, his lies. In Hamlet(Act 1, Scene 5), lies bring a nation to the brink of crisis. Hamlet’s father, who has become a ghost due to the injustice of being murdered by his own brother who took the throne, reveals the truth to Hamlet:
"’Tis given out that, sleeping in my orchard,
A serpent stung me. So the whole ear of Denmark
Is by a forged process of my death
Rankly abused. But know, thou noble youth,
The serpent that did sting thy father’s life
Now wears his crown.
Brief let me be.
Sleeping within my orchard,
My custom always of the afternoon,
Upon my secure hour thy uncle stole,
With juice of cursed hebenon in a vial,
And in the porches of my ears did pour
The leperous distilment; whose effect
Holds such an enmity with blood of man..."
Just as hebenon rotted the king’s body in Hamlet, the lies of a leader are a poison that eats away at a nation. One lie leads to another, eventually destroying the trust of the people and infecting democracy itself. Yoon Suk-yeol’s lie that “my mother-in-law may have been scammed before, but she’s never caused even ten won’s worth of harm to anyone.” his false claim that his wife, when accused of shamanistic practices, “has been devoted to church since childhood and have memorized the entire Old Testament,” his lie during the Kwanhun Club debate that he lost 40 million won(approximately 30,000 USD) in the Deutsch Motors stock manipulation scandal involving his wife, and his lie during his candidacy that the accusation document written by Son Jun-sung, a prosecutor directly under Yoon Seok-yeol when he was Prosecutor General, was a 'fabricated paper' In fact, we could say Yoon became Prosecutor General through lies. Even in his final argument before the Constitutional Court, he falsely claimed, “The opposition party cut military funds that are like the very eyes of the army,” asserting that 485.2 billion won(0.359 billion USD) for North Korean surveillance and reconnaissance projects had been reduced. But It was, in fact, a plan the government had reduced from the beginning. And Didn’t an official from the Defense Acquisition Program Administration say that the four projects — including the long-range surface-to-air missile project and the drone defense project — were not unilaterally cut by the opposition party, but rather reduced through agreement? During his candidacy, Yoon Suk-yeol said, “Why refuse a special prosecutor? You refuse because you’ve committed a crime.” Yet as president, he vetoed every special prosecutor bill concerning his wife. Isn’t this series of actions not only deeply shocking but also infuriating?
Yoon’s repeated lies and abuse of power, especially his unconstitutional and unlawful behavior, make impeachment inevitable. Article 77(3) of the Constitution provides that the National Assembly may request the lifting of martial law — this is the only constitutional check on a president’s power to declare it. But Yoon deployed martial law troops to the National Assembly to prevent a vote on such a request, clearly violating the Constitution. If we allow individuals from the executive, legislative, or judicial branches to act above the law, democracy in South Korea will descend into a bottomless pit. To restore justice and regain the people’s trust—that Isn't the only way for South Korea to restore its democracy and contribute to the global civil society?
This column is an English translation of an article written on April 2, 2025, two days before the Constitutional Court upheld the impeachment of President Yoon Suk-yeol on April 4.
