From Power to Prison: The Recurring Fate of South Korean Presidents

South Korea has a strong national anti-Japanese consciousness, and although it is a neighboring country, I usually pay no attention to it. However, the fate of not only this incident but also that of successive presidents is so extraordinary that I decided to compile this overview.

The Fate of South Korean Presidents

I had an impression that South Korean presidents tend to fall from grace after their terms, so I decided to verify this pattern. Below is a list showing the fate of past South Korean presidents. This is quite unimaginable for a developed nation, making one wonder, "What's going on with this country?"

It makes sense, however, when you consider that Korea is known as the "Land of Han" (a cultural concept of deep-seated grievance and resentment).

List of South Korean Presidents (1948-Present)

Generation	Name	Term	Status
1st-3rd	Syngman Rhee	1948-1960	Exiled
4th	Yun Po-sun	1960-1961	Arrest/Military Rule
5th-9th	Park Chung-hee	1963-1979	Assassination
10th	Choi Kyu-hah	1979-1980	-
11th-12th	Chun Doo-hwan	1980-1987	Arrest/Military Rule
13th	Roh Tae-woo	1987-1993	Arrest/Military Rule
14th	Kim Young-sam	1993-1998	Family's Corruption
15th	Kim Dae-jung	1998-2003	Family's Corruption
16th	Roh Moo-hyun	2003-2008	Suicide
17th	Lee Myung-bak	2008-2013	Arrest/Military Rule
18th	Park Geun-hye	2013-2017	Arrest/Military Rule
19th	Moon Jae-in	2017-2022	Under Investigation for Bribery
20th	Yoon Suk-yeol	2022-	Arrest Warrant Issued

Factors Behind the Presidential Tragedy

I believe there are several structural factors behind this remarkable situation.

First, there is the immense presidential power. The South Korean presidency is often called an "imperial presidency" due to its extensive authority. This might be a necessary political structure for a country technically still at war (as they are only in an armistice with North Korea). This enormous power inevitably generates intense scrutiny and subsequent accountability. This concentrated power is combined with the influence of "Sinocentrism" (traditional hierarchical worldview). It may be creating a chain of retribution where investigating and arresting former administration officials serves to legitimize the new regime.

Next is the complex relationship between politics and prosecution. The prosecution holds substantial power and significant political influence. As a result, investigations into previous administrations tend to occur with each change of government. This "judicalization of politics" has become a characteristic feature of South Korean politics. Former President Moon Jae-in was reportedly trying to reform this system for his own protection.

Finally, there is the power of civil society. Since democratization in 1987, citizens have maintained a high level of political engagement, and public scrutiny of corruption and misconduct is extremely intense. Large-scale demonstrations are not uncommon, and social media has further intensified the monitoring of politicians. There's also a historical aspect: the long history of subordination to China and social inequality under the class system may be fueling these extreme reactions to authority figures.

Conclusion

While some criticize this situation as indicating the immaturity of South Korean democracy, others view it as embodying the democratic ideal. This ideal states that "those in power are equally subject to the law."

This "presidential tragedy" might be reflecting fundamental challenges facing South Korea. These challenges include the balance between power and responsibility, democracy and the rule of law, and reconciliation with the past while looking toward the future.