Prosecutors indict YouTuber Shin Hye-sik on aiding charges over Seoul Western District Court riot

Shin Hye-sik, the operator of the YouTube channel Sinuihansoo, and others who had been under investigation for allegedly inciting violence during the Seoul Western District Court riot have been indicted.

Prosecutors applied the lesser charge of aiding and abetting, however, rather than the instigation charge police had sought. While police concluded that the suspects had prompted others to commit crimes — meeting the legal threshold for instigation — prosecutors determined their conduct amounted only to facilitating offenses the principals had already decided to commit.

The Seoul Western District Public Prosecutors Office indicted Shin and three other conservative-leaning YouTubers without detention on Friday on charges of aiding and abetting aggravated trespass and obstruction of official duties in connection with the riot, according to NoCut News.

Shin and the others had been investigated as suspected masterminds of the riot, alongside Pastor Jeon Kwang-hun. The unrest broke out on Jan. 19 last year, immediately after a court issued an arrest warrant for former President Yoon Suk Yeol.

Some of the suspects also face charges of violating the Assembly and Demonstration Act for allegedly leading an unregistered rally from Jan. 18 last year through the early hours of the following day.

The original instigation charges — aggravated trespass by instigation and obstruction of official duties by instigation — that police had applied were not carried forward.

The Seoul Metropolitan Police Agency's security investigation unit had earlier concluded that an organized chain of command existed, running from Jeon's closest aides down to on-the-ground operatives. Investigators said the group relayed Jeon's statements to stoke the riot.

On that basis, police referred the case to prosecutors on March 25 with instigation charges against Shin and the others. Police also sought an arrest warrant for Shin, but prosecutors rejected it twice.

Prosecutors chose not to adopt the instigation charge and instead indicted the suspects without detention on the aiding and abetting charge. They determined that the suspects' conduct did not rise to the level of instigation — defined as causing a person who had no intention of committing a crime to resolve to do so.

Under the criminal code, an instigator — someone who induces a person with no prior criminal intent to commit an offense — faces the same sentence as the principal offender. An accessory who merely facilitates a crime the principal had already decided to commit is subject to a reduced sentence.