Special Prosecutor Appeal for Harsher Sentence

Special prosecutor appeal in case against Mother Han tests the limits of investigative powers granted by current Lee Jae-myung administration

The legal battle surrounding Hak Ja Han (한학자), leader of the Family Federation for World Peace and Unification – often referred to in South Korean media as Unificationism (통일교) – entered a new phase on 4^th September, when the Kim Keon-hee (김건희) Special Prosecutor’s Team led by Min Joong-gi (민중기) formally appealed the Seoul Central District Court’s first-instance judgment. The court had sentenced Hak Ja Han (한학자) – also called Mother Han – to a total of two years in prison on 31^st August in a case concerning alleged political dealings between the religious organization and figures associated with the former Yoon Suk-yeol (윤석열) administration.

See also State’s Faith War: Prosecution to Dissolution

See also Mother Han Appeal Tests Prosecutorial Authority

See also Pompeo: Mother Han (83) Targeted for Her Beliefs

See also Preserve the FFWPU Bridge to North Korea

See also Embracing Role of Peacemaker When Persecuted

A large number of South Korean media outlets reported on 4^th September on the appeal.

Special Prosecutor: the sentence was too lenient

Yonhap News gives the most detailed account of the Special Prosecutor’s legal objections and reports that they appealed on two principal grounds: “unfair sentencing” and “misinterpretation of the law concerning the scope of the investigation”. The prosecution argues that the two-year sentence does not adequately reflect the seriousness of the case.

One of its main objections concerns the first-instance court’s consideration of the activities of Mother Han in promoting world peace as a mitigating circumstance. According to Yonhap, the Special Prosecutor’s Team characterized this as a “vague and abstract” reason that should not have been given significant weight in sentencing.

The prosecution also objects to the court’s assessment of the motive behind the alleged offenses. The court regarded the expansion of the Family Federation‘s religious and political influence, rather than personal enrichment, as a favorable consideration. The Special Prosecutor’s Team considers this reasoning inappropriate.

Maeil Ilbo highlights the same point in its headline, describing the two-year sentence as “light compared with the nature of the offense”. It also draws attention to the prosecution’s comparison with Yoon Yeong-ho (윤영호), the former director-general of the Family Federation‘s World Headquarters. Yoon had previously received a one-year-and-six-month sentence that was finalized by the Supreme Court and received a further six-month sentence in the present case. The prosecution argues that the resulting two years is the same as Mother Han‘s sentence, despite its view that her position and responsibility in the alleged activities warranted a substantially heavier punishment.

Disagreement over which charges could legally be investigated

A second major element of the appeal concerns the scope of the Kim Keon-hee (김건희) Special Prosecutor Act, a piece of legislation passed by the South Korean parliament – where Lee Jae-myung (이재명) holds a super-majority – to establish “independent” directly state-appointed prosecutors to investigate corruption, bribery, and market manipulation involving the former First Lady, Kim Keon-hee (김건희). The act bypasses standard state prosecutors not trusted by the current Lee administration.

The first-instance court dismissed several charges without reaching a substantive judgment because it concluded that they fell outside the offenses that the Special Prosecutor was legally authorized to investigate. These included a charge alleging that Mother Han had instructed the destruction or concealment of evidence, as well as certain allegations concerning the “embezzlement” of funds allegedly connected with political financing involving politicians overseas.

Yonhap, MBC News, Kookje Shinmun, and Maeil Ilbo all report the Special Prosecutor’s objection that the court’s interpretation of the investigative mandate was legally incorrect. The prosecution describes the court’s interpretation of the statutory language concerning evidence destruction as “clearly contrary to the wording of the law”.

Kukmin Ilbo, however, provides an additional argument from the Special Prosecutor’s side concerning alleged embezzlement of funds from institutions affiliated with the Family Federation. The prosecution maintains that it was legitimate to investigate these funds because they might have subsequently been provided to people on the Yoon Suk-yeol (윤석열) side, including Kim Keon-hee (김건희) and Kweon Seong-dong (권성동). According to the prosecution, the fact that investigators ultimately failed to establish such a connection does not mean that the original investigation itself was unlawful.

This is an important distinction: the Special Prosecutors are arguing that the legality of initiating the investigation should be assessed on the basis of the information and circumstances available when the investigation began, rather than retrospectively on the basis of whether the suspected connection was ultimately proven.

Newspim emphasizes the broader constitutional argument

Newspim gives the strongest emphasis to the Special Prosecutor’s characterization of the case as much more than an ordinary corruption or political-funding case. It reports the prosecution’s assertion that the case concerns a religious organization allegedly joining forces with political power to interfere in state affairs, thereby infringing constitutional principles including the separation of religion and state and representative democracy.

The Special Prosecutor’s Team therefore argues that the social harm allegedly caused by the case, together with the seriousness of the offenses, makes the two-year sentence disproportionate to the defendants’ alleged responsibility. This framing is significant because it presents the prosecution’s appeal not merely as an attempt to increase an individual prison sentence, but as a challenge based on what it considers to be the broader constitutional and political significance of the case.

Appeal against continued suspension of detention

The Special Prosecutor has also appealed the court’s decision to extend the suspension of detention for Mother Han (83) who suffers from several serious health issues.

The first-instance court, with Woo In-seong (우인성) as presiding judge, had extended the suspension on 1^st September, the day after the verdict, allowing her to remain outside detention until 6 p.m. on 30^th September. The decision was reportedly based in part on her deteriorating health and medical circumstances.

Newspim notes that this was the fifth extension of the suspension of detention. The other reports likewise emphasize that the Special Prosecutor is challenging this decision separately from its appeal against the sentence.

At present, Mother Han‘s own legal team has not filed an appeal, according to Yonhap, MBC News, Kookje Shinmun, and Maeil Ilbo.

What the first-instance judgment actually decided

The 4^th September reports also recall that Mother Han was convicted on several central charges. She received one year for violating the Political Funds Act and another one year for violating the Improper Solicitation and Graft Act and for occupational embezzlement, producing the combined two-year sentence.

At the same time, the court did not accept every allegation. Some occupational embezzlement charges resulted in acquittals, while the evidence-destruction and certain overseas political-funding-related embezzlement charges were dismissed because the court considered them outside the Special Prosecutor’s statutory investigative jurisdiction.

Thus, the 4^th September appeal is significant for two separate reasons: the Special Prosecutor is seeking a harsher sentence, but is also asking the appellate court to reconsider several fundamental legal rulings about which charges could properly be investigated and prosecuted.

The case therefore moves into the appeal stage with substantial disagreements remaining – not only over the appropriate punishment for Mother Han, but also over the legal boundaries of the Special Prosecutor’s investigation itself.

See also State’s Faith War: Prosecution to Dissolution

See also Mother Han Appeal Tests Prosecutorial Authority

See also Pompeo: Mother Han (83) Targeted for Her Beliefs

See also Preserve the FFWPU Bridge to North Korea

See also Embracing Role of Peacemaker When Persecuted

See also No Charges Over Family Federation Probe Delay

Text: Knut Holdhus, editor

Featured image above: Special prosecutor appeal for a harsher sentence. Illustration: ChatGPT, 5^th September 2026.

Related to special prosecutor appeal: Mother Han: The Dangers of Guilt by Position

Related to special prosecutor appeal: Mother Han: Beyond One Trial – the Wider Stakes

Related to special prosecutor appeal: At Issue: Religions Taking Reality Seriously

Also related to special prosecutor appeal: Religion Between Engagement and Withdrawal

Also related to special prosecutor appeal: State Failure and Non-State Peace Projects

More, related to special prosecutor appeal: Detention: Harsh Cell Conditions Spark Outcry

And more, related to special prosecutor appeal: Official Statement on Recent Media Coverage

Also related to special prosecutor appeal: Defense Challenges Core Claims of Indictment

And also related to special prosecutor appeal: Unificationism Emerging as a World Religion

More, related to special prosecutor appeal: Decline of Family Values Creates Social Crisis

And more, related to special prosecutor appeal: Unificationism, Industry, and Cold War Survival

And more, related to special prosecutor appeal: Movement Promoting Family as National Solution

Yet more, related to special prosecutor appeal: “Church Closure” Risks in South Korea’s New Bill

Still more, related to special prosecutor appeal: Mother Han Nominated for Nobel Peace Prize 2026

Also related to special prosecutor appeal: Democratic Party’s Assault on Family Federation

And even more, related to special prosecutor appeal: Mother Han (82) in Poor Health in Damp, Cold Cell

And still more, related to special prosecutor appeal: Korean Crisis: “True Democracy Must Serve Heaven”

And yet more, related to special prosecutor appeal: Faith Leaders Protest State Assault on Religion

And more, related to special prosecutor appeal: Trump Raises Alarm Over Church Raids in Korea

Even more, related to special prosecutor appeal: Mike Pompeo Calls Probe of Co-Founder “Lawfare”

Still more, related to special prosecutor appeal:  Korean Faith Crackdown: USA Urged to Confront It

Yet more, related to special prosecutor appeal: Korean Bribery Scandal: Media Clears Federation

Related to special prosecutor appeal: Lawfare: State Uses Legal System in War on Faith

More, related to special prosecutor appeal: Shocked Author: “Japan Ignores Basics of Justice”

 Still more, related to special prosecutor appeal: Legal Inconsistencies A Blow to Democracy

Even more, related to special prosecutor appeal: Japan: Court Accused of Using Speculation

Also related to special prosecutor appeal: MEXT’s Legal Spin and “Dissolution at All Costs”

Also related to special prosecutor appeal: UN Report: Japan’s Lawfare Against Faith Minority

And also related to special prosecutor appeal: Protesting No Transparency in Closed-Door Trial