Indictment Language Challenged by Defense

New hearing in case against Mother Han: Defense argues prejudice in courtroom battle over religious language, funds, and health of detained defendant

OhmyNews (오마이뉴스), a South Korean online newspaper widely known for pioneering a citizen journalism model, reported 25^th February on the 13th trial of Hak Ja Han (한학자) – also called Mother Han – the leader of Unificationism (통일교), a religious movement founded in the 1950s. The hearing took place at Seoul Central District Court and centered not only on allegations of unlawful political activities, but also on a deeper dispute about religion, public perception, and the boundaries of what a criminal court should consider.

See also Trump Adviser’s Praise for Mother Han Noticed

See also Faith as Door-Opener in Informal Diplomacy

See also Global Clergy Visit Detained Mother Han

See also Testimony Dispute Takes Center Stage in Trial

See also Religion, Politics, and Money at Center of Trial

See also Alleged Attempt to Influence Witness Statements

To understand the significance of the day’s exchanges, some background may be necessary. Since the death of Sun Myung Moon (문선명), her husband, in 2012, she has led the organization, now named the Family Federation for World Peace and Unification, which operates globally and maintains religious, educational, and peace-building networks. According to the OhmyNews article, in South Korea the Federation has frequently been criticized by mainstream Protestant groups as a “heresy”, a label that carries strong social stigma.

Mother Han is currently on trial along with two former senior Federation officials: Yoon Yeong-ho (윤영호), a former World Headquarters director, and Jeong Won-ju (정원주), her former chief of staff. Special prosecutors appointed by the current left-leaning Lee administration have charged the three with violations of the Political Funds Act and the Improper Solicitation and Graft Act, among other offenses. At issue are allegations that Federation funds or networks were used to channel money or gifts to politicians and politically connected figures.

Reporter Lee Jin-min (이진민) writes for OhmyNews that the 25^th February hearing revealed two parallel strategies from Mother Han’s legal team. The first involved a procedural dispute about terminology and religious prejudice. The second involved shifting responsibility onto Yoon Yeong-ho (윤영호) for allegedly improper political contacts.

During the afternoon session, Hak Ja Han’s lawyers objected to the way a specific term used by the religious organization – “national restoration” – appears in the indictment and in earlier testimony. In the internal language of Unificationism, this phrase carries theological meaning tied to the movement’s vision of moral and spiritual renewal. The defense argued that the term’s meaning has not been clearly defined in the legal documents and may be misunderstood by the court or by the public.

According to Mother Han’s lawyers, misunderstanding such terminology could unfairly shape perceptions of intent. They claimed that widespread media portrayals of the Family Federation as a heretical or fringe sect might bias judgments about guilt. To address this, they asked the court to call a professor – described as a doctrinal expert – to testify about the movement’s theology and clarify the meaning of “national restoration”.

However, the presiding judge, Woo In-seong (우인성), firmly rejected the request. He stated that the courtroom is not a venue for doctrinal lectures. In his view, the purpose of the trial is to determine whether specific laws were violated, not to evaluate whether Unificationism is orthodox, heterodox, or socially stigmatized. If the defense wished to clarify terminology, he suggested, they could submit written materials instead of calling a live expert witness.

Mother Han’s legal team pushed back. They argued that former director Yoon had interpreted her intentions through the lens of Unificationist doctrine, and that the disputed term connected to subsequent actions – such as an alleged 100 million won (approximately 70,000 U.S. dollars) payment to conservative lawmaker Kweon Seong-dong (권성동) and donations to regional branches of the People Power Party. Because theology allegedly informed Yoon’s understanding of Mother Han’s direction, they said, doctrinal explanation was directly relevant.

OhmyNews points out that Judge Woo again declined. He suggested that if the defense wished to clarify Mother Han’s intentions, it would be more appropriate to question her directly rather than rely on a third-party interpretation of doctrine. He emphasized that the court is not examining whether Unificationism is heretical; it is examining alleged criminal conduct. After further insistence from the defense, the judge reaffirmed his refusal.

This exchange highlights a key tension in the case. Mother Han’s side appears concerned that broader social hostility toward the Family Federation could color the court’s interpretation of evidence. The judge, by contrast, is attempting to keep the proceedings narrowly focused on statutory violations rather than theological debates.

The second major theme of the hearing was the defense’s continued effort to assign primary responsibility to Yoon Yeong-ho (윤영호). Mother Han’s team has consistently argued that if improper political contacts occurred, they were driven by Yoon’s personal ambition rather than by instructions from Mother Han.

To support this narrative, the defense pointed to events after Yoon’s dismissal from the Family Federation. They noted that in 2024, a youth organization called the GPD Foundation – established by Yoon after his removal – held an event that received congratulatory remarks from lawmaker Kweon Seong-dong (권성동). The implication was that Yoon independently cultivated political ties for his own purposes.

Hak Ja Han’s lawyers argued that during Yoon’s tenure there were several controversial actions: the alleged payment of 100 million won (ca. 70,000 US dollars) to Kweon, the provision of a luxury gift to Kim Keon-hee (김건희 – a prominent public figure and spouse of a former president), the use of split donations to avoid reporting thresholds, contacts with politicians via an intermediary, and promotion of a Cambodian development project known as the MPP initiative. They asked rhetorically whether the Family Federation continued these projects after Yoon’s expulsion. According to them, it did not – suggesting that the initiatives were tied to Yoon personally.

Furthermore, the defense maintained that matters reported to Mother Han were limited to religious ceremonies and internal faith activities. They asserted that there is no evidence she gave prior instructions or approval for political activities. Jeong Won-ju’s legal team echoed this argument, also criticizing Yoon in connection with lawmaker Kweon’s participation in the foundation event.

Another striking moment in the hearing involved a witness: Yoon’s sister-in-law, identified only by her surname Lee. She is believed to have purchased a Chanel handbag that prosecutors allege was later given to Kim Keon-hee’s side. Defense attorneys questioned her about whether she bought the bag at the request of Yoon’s wife, who had served as a Federation finance director, and whether she had been instructed to avoid encountering Hak Ja Han at the department store. Lee did not respond to the questions, remaining silent throughout.

According to the OhmyNews article, finally, Mother Han’s health and detention status were briefly raised. Her legal team stated that after returning to the detention center on 21^st February, she suffered a nosebleed the following day. They submitted an additional written opinion in support of a bail request originally filed in November. As of the hearing date 25^th February, no decision on bail had been announced.

Prosecutors from the special counsel team investigating matters related to Kim Keon-hee (김건희) attended the hearing, along with a large group of defense attorneys representing Mother Han.

The 25^th February session at Seoul Central District Court did not resolve the core legal questions but clarified the strategic lines of the case. Mother Han’s defense is attempting to frame the controversy as partly shaped by misunderstanding and prejudice against her religious movement, while also isolating alleged political misconduct to a subordinate official. The court, meanwhile, has signaled that it intends to confine the trial to concrete legal evidence rather than broader debates about theology or reputation. The next hearing is scheduled for 6^th March, when these arguments are likely to continue unfolding within the narrow procedural framework the judge has set.

See also Trump Adviser’s Praise for Mother Han Noticed

See also Faith as Door-Opener in Informal Diplomacy

See also Global Clergy Visit Detained Mother Han

See also Testimony Dispute Takes Center Stage in Trial

See also Religion, Politics, and Money at Center of Trial

See also Alleged Attempt to Influence Witness Statements

Text: Knut Holdhus, editor

Featured image above: Infographic summary of 13th trial of Mother Han on 25th February 2026. Illustration: Chat GPT, February 2026 

See also In Tiny Solitary Cell: Irreversible Harm Caused

See also Mother Han Released 10 Days for Medical Reasons

See also Emotional Scenes as Mother Han Is Freed Briefly

See also Religious Freedom Threat: China-Led Alliance

See also Gingrich Warns Against State Control of Faith

See also Domino Effect of Religious Persecution in Asia

See also Unificationism, Industry, and Cold War Survival

See also Current Korean Situation: Context and Key Issues

See also Court: Prosecutors’ Overreach in Politicized Case

See also S. Korea’s Troubling Pattern of Selective Probes

See also Unificationism Emerging as a World Religion

See also Alarm Over State Interference in Religion

Related to indictment language challenged: Mother Han’s December Trial: Long Detention Ahead

Also related to indictment language challenged: A 10-Minute Visit to Mother Han in Detention

Also related to indictment language challenged: Denying Allegations: Hak Ja Han (82) in Inquiry

Also related to indictment language challenged: SKorean Court’s Sharp Criticism of Prosecutors

And also related to indictment language challenged: Detention: Harsh Cell Conditions Spark Outcry

More, related to indictment language challenged: Ugly: Arrest Warrant Sought for Hak Ja Han (82)

And more, related to indictment language challenged: Critics Warn of “Authoritarian Drift” in SKorea

Even more, related to indictment language challenged: Court Decision to Prolong Detention Condemned

Still more, related to indictment language challenged: Co-Founder, 82, Questioned 9 Hours by Prosecutors

Also related to indictment language challenged: Democratic Party’s Assault on Family Federation

And even more, related to indictment language challenged: Mother Han (82) in Poor Health in Damp, Cold Cell

And still more, related to indictment language challenged: Korean Crisis: “True Democracy Must Serve Heaven”

And yet more, related to indictment language challenged: Faith Leaders Protest State Assault on Religion

Also related to indictment language challenged: News Release Blasts Indictment of Hak Ja Han, 82

More, related to indictment language challenged: 70 Years On: Detention History Repeats Itself

And more, related to indictment language challenged: Trump Raises Alarm Over Church Raids in Korea

Even more, related to indictment language challenged: Mike Pompeo Calls Probe of Co-Founder “Lawfare”

Still more, related to indictment language challenged:  Korean Faith Crackdown: USA Urged to Confront It

Yet more, related to indictment language challenged: Korean Bribery Scandal: Media Clears Federation

And also related to indictment language challenged: Raids Blur Line Between Justice and Politics

More, related to indictment language challenged: Heavy-Handed Raid on Sacred Sites Condemned