Records prove secrecy premise in POW row despite no signed deal, Seoul says

South Korea and Ukraine remain at odds over whether a binding confidentiality understanding governed the transfer of two North Korean prisoners of war, with Seoul saying a secrecy consensus existed from the start and Kyiv denying any official agreement. Seoul acknowledges that no formal nondisclosure document was signed but says internal meeting records support its position. The dispute has intensified after Seoul recalled its ambassador and continued demanding an apology, while Ukraine says the matter is closed.

South Korean officials said Seoul and Kyiv communicated on the basis that the entire negotiation would remain confidential, although no official nondisclosure document was signed.

A Cheong Wa Dae source confirmed there was no written nondisclosure agreement, while a diplomat suggested the negotiations may have involved agencies other than presidents or foreign ministries.

Seoul recalled its ambassador to Ukraine last week and said it was still awaiting an apology and measures to prevent a recurrence.

Ukrainian Foreign Minister Andrii Sybiha said the dispute resulted from differing interpretations of confidentiality arrangements during the POW transfer process and considered the matter closed.

Volodymyr Zelenskyy announced on Sept. 23 that two North Korean POWs had been transferred to South Korea, about 20 months after their capture in Russia’s Kursk region.

Published Oct 13, 2026 4:11 pm KST

Updated Oct 13, 2026 4:31 pm KST

Foreign Minister Cho Hyun, right, shakes hands with Ukrainian Foreign Minister Andrii Sybiha ahead of their talks at the foreign ministry building in Seoul, June 30. Newsis

South Korea and Ukraine remain at odds over the scope of a "binding" nondisclosure agreement regarding the transfer of two North Korean prisoners of war (POWs), with the dispute now centering on a fine but crucial distinction: Seoul says a consensus on confidentiality existed from the start of negotiations, while Kyiv says no official document of any agreement exists.

South Korean officials acknowledged that no formal nondisclosure agreement was signed, but maintained that both sides had operated from the beginning under a shared understanding that the entire negotiation would remain confidential.

"There is no official document signed by the two sides on nondisclosure," a senior foreign ministry official told The Korea Times. "We have internal documents on the meetings, which we cannot disclose. But Seoul and Kyiv have been communicating based on the consensus that the entire negotiation should remain subject to a binding nondisclosure agreement."

The official added that President Lee Jae Myung’s remarks on the matter “have some grounds” and that Cheong Wa Dae and the foreign ministry “are aligned and share the same understanding.”

A source at Cheong Wa Dae separately confirmed to The Korea Times that there is no written nondisclosure agreement.

Another diplomat shed light on how the gap between the two sides may have emerged.

“Normally, a word-by-word full transcript is documented between presidents or at least the whole meeting will be documented between foreign ministers and senior officials," the diplomat said. "Given that, there is a possibility that one side is not telling the truth or the negotiations were made between other agencies such as spy agencies.”

The standoff has hardened since Seoul recalled its ambassador to Ukraine last week in protest of what it called an “insufficient” response from Kyiv. A foreign ministry official on Tuesday told reporters that Seoul is still waiting for an apology from Kyiv as well as measures to prevent any recurrence.

Ukraine, meanwhile, appears to consider the matter settled.

"We consider the matter closed," Ukrainian Foreign Minister Andrii Sybiha was quoted on Monday by RBC Ukraine as saying. Sybiha said the disagreement stemmed from differing interpretations of the confidentiality arrangements at various stages of the POW transfer process, according to the report.

"We have a very promising, mutually beneficial future ahead of us. I believe diplomacy will certainly prevail in our relations, and this episode will be left behind," the Ukrainian foreign minister said.

The Ukrainian Embassy in Seoul did not immediately respond to requests for comment.

The dispute was set off by Ukrainian President Volodymyr Zelenskyy’s announcement during his U.N. General Assembly address on Sept. 23 that two North Korean POWs had been transferred to South Korea — about 20 months after their capture in Russia’s Kursk region. Seoul says the two countries agreed to keep the transfer confidential at Kyiv’s request. Kyiv denies any such agreement existed.

Korea Times reporter Kim Bo-kyoung contributed to this article.

韩国和乌克兰在移交两名朝鲜战俘一事上仍存在分歧，双方认为是否存在具有约束力的保密协议。首尔方面表示，双方从一开始就达成了保密共识，而基辅方面则否认存在任何正式协议。首尔承认双方并未签署正式的保密文件，但表示内部会议记录支持其立场。在首尔召回驻乌克兰大使并继续要求乌克兰道歉后，双方的争端进一步升级，而乌克兰方面则表示此事已经结束。

韩国官员表示，首尔和基辅在谈判过程中一直秉持保密原则，尽管双方并未签署正式的保密协议。

青瓦台消息人士证实，双方没有签署书面保密协议；而一位外交官则暗示，谈判可能涉及总统或外交部以外的机构。

首尔上周召回了驻乌克兰大使，并表示仍在等待乌克兰道歉和防止类似事件再次发生的措施。

乌克兰外交部长安德烈·西比哈表示，这场争端源于对战俘移交过程中保密安排的不同解读，他认为此事已经结束。

9月23日，弗拉基米尔·泽连斯基宣布，两名朝鲜战俘在俄罗斯库尔斯克地区被俘约20个月后，已被移交给韩国。

发布于2026年10月13日下午4:11（韩国标准时间）

更新于2026年10月13日下午4:31（韩国标准时间）

6月30日，韩国外交部长赵显铉（右）在首尔外交部大楼与乌克兰外长安德烈·西比哈举行会谈前握手。（Newsis）

韩国和乌克兰在移交两名朝鲜战俘的“具有约束力的”保密协议的范围上仍然存在分歧，目前的争议焦点在于一个细微但至关重要的区别：首尔方面表示，从谈判开始就存在保密共识，而基辅方面则表示，没有任何正式的协议文件。

韩国官员承认双方没有签署正式的保密协议，但坚称双方从一开始就达成共识，即整个谈判过程将保密。

一位外交部高级官员告诉《韩国时报》：“双方没有签署任何关于保密的正式文件。我们有一些关于会谈的内部文件，但无法公开。不过，首尔和基辅一直基于这样的共识进行沟通：整个谈判过程都应受到具有约束力的保密协议的约束。”

该官员补充说，李在明总统对此事的评论“有一定的依据”，青瓦台和外交部“立场一致，看法相同”。

青瓦台一位消息人士也向《韩国时报》证实，双方没有签署书面保密协议。

另一位外交官阐述了双方分歧可能产生的原因。

这位外交官说：“通常情况下，总统会晤会逐字逐句地完整记录下来，或者至少外交部长和高级官员会晤的整个过程都会被记录下来。鉴于此，有可能一方没有说实话，或者谈判是由其他机构（例如间谍机构）进行的。”

自首尔上周召回驻乌克兰大使以抗议基辅方面“反应不足”以来，双方对峙局势进一步恶化。周二，一位外交部官员告诉记者，首尔仍在等待基辅方面的道歉以及防止类似事件再次发生的措施。

与此同时，乌克兰方面似乎认为此事已经解决。

据乌克兰RBC新闻周一报道，乌克兰外交部长安德烈·西比哈表示：“我们认为此事已经了结。”报道称，西比哈表示，分歧源于对战俘移交过程中各个阶段保密安排的不同解读。

“我们拥有一个充满希望、互利共赢的未来。我相信外交手段必将在我们的关系中占据主导地位，而这一事件也必将成为过去。”乌克兰外交部长说道。

乌克兰驻首尔大使馆尚未对此事作出回应。

这场争端源于乌克兰总统泽连斯基9月23日在联合国大会上宣布，两名朝鲜战俘已于约20个月前在俄罗斯库尔斯克地区被俘后移交给韩国。首尔方面称，应基辅的要求，两国同意对此次移交保密。基辅方面则否认存在任何此类协议。

《韩国时报》记者金宝京对本文亦有贡献。