Protesters rally for President Yoon Suk Yeol in front of Seoul Western District Court, Friday, while the court reviewed a warrant to arrest Yoon. Yonhap

Angry protesters broke into the Seoul Western District Court early Sunday morning after the court approved a warrant for the arrest of detained President Yoon Suk Yeol. Yoon became the first sitting president to be arrested.

Some demonstrators shouted at the police who were trying to prevent them from entering, directing their anger at the judge who issued the warrant. Several people were injured in the ensuing chaos. Meanwhile, many others outside the court continued chanting pro-Yoon slogans.

The protesters were part of the large group of Yoon supporters — hundreds of thousands — who had gathered in front of the court the previous day. These supporters had rallied peacefully as the detained president arrived to attend the court's review of the warrant sought by the Corruption Investigation Office for High-ranking Officials (CIO). Some supporters had even spent the night outside, anxiously awaiting the court's decision. They were devastated when the warrant was approved.

While their frustration is understandable, violence is never the solution. It cannot be justified under any circumstances. Threatening judges, no matter how unfavorable the decision, is inappropriate and unacceptable.

Tensions have risen between Yoon's supporters and the judiciary as the president's fate now rests with the eight Constitutional Court justices. In addition to the impeachment trial, Yoon is also preparing for another legal battle with the CIO on charges of insurrection.

Judges who issued warrants to search and arrest Yoon, along with the Constitutional Court justices, have become targets of extreme Yoon supporters. The Constitutional Court's website message board has been inundated daily with accusations against the court and its justices, accusing them of bias in handling the impeachment trial.

So Jun-sub, a judge at the Seoul Central District Court, received a death threat after rejecting a petition to release Yoon on Thursday. An internet user posted that he would kill So if he encountered him. The Seoul Metropolitan Police's cybercrime unit immediately launched an investigation. On Saturday, the individual, whose name has not been released for privacy reasons, turned himself in and was taken into custody. The police emphasized the seriousness of the case and stated that individuals who post such threatening messages will be prosecuted in accordance with the law.

Like Judge So, judges handling Yoon's legal battle with the CIO are facing various threats from his supporters. Yoon's legal team filed an unsuccessful petition to release him before the CIO sought the arrest warrant on Friday. Supporters of the president hoped for the court's approval of the petition and attempted to influence the judge by staging tireless pro-Yoon rallies. Whenever the court's decisions went against their wishes, protesters accused the judges of making "unlawful, biased" decisions. On Saturday, they occupied the roads surrounding the Seoul Western District Court, holding energetic yet peaceful rallies in an attempt to save the president from impeachment. They chanted slogans such as "Acquit the president," "Dissolve the CIO" and "The impeachment motion is a sham."

Freedom of speech and association must be safeguarded in a democratic nation like South Korea. However, there are boundaries that must not be crossed. Criticizing judges or the judiciary is acceptable as long as it is done peacefully. But coercing judges, resorting to blackmail and issuing death threats are entirely unacceptable.

Judges' decisions should be respected once they are made. However, this does not necessarily mean they are flawless. Some judges have become the object of controversy with what their opponents see as their seemingly biased rulings.

For starters, controversy erupted when the Seoul Western District Court approved warrants to search and detain Yoon at his residence in central Seoul's Hannam-dong. Yoon's followers claimed the presidential residence is a military facility, requiring investigators to obtain approval from the person in charge of the facility. The court issued the warrants with a note granting the CIO investigators unrestricted access, rebuffing the claim from Yoon's legal team. CIO should have been able to secure more persuasive legal ground to prevent unnecessary disputes from arising.

Judges speak through their verdicts. The judiciary is expected to be impartial, ensuring that trials are fair and just. Judges and Constitutional Court justices must remain mindful of the gravity of their decisions, striving to make fair rulings based solely on the law. Their decisions should leave no room for controversy.

Despite the controvery over the fairness of the court's ruling, there should not be any attempts to trespass at the courthouses, as this is equivalent to eroding the very foundations of democracy and the value of rule of law. Such riots should not be tolerated at any rate and must be sternly punished in accordance with related laws and rules.