This paper reflects on the conditions of possibility for developing a Korean Christian political theology—both as a method and as an object of study—after the constitutional crisis caused by President Yoon's declaration of martial law, his impeachment, and the subsequent theological defenses of his extraconstitutional authority. While highlighting Korean Christian debates during and after the 2024 martial law crisis, the paper examines how the "state of emergency" is understood and communicated by Korean right-wing Christians and traces how the perceived crisis of minjok continues to texture their appeal to "exception." This paper understands the problem of Korean Christian Nationalism not as its deployment of the discourse of "nation," but as its lack of an adequate political theology grounded in the undeniable reality of minjok. The central, twofold contention of this paper is that Korean political theology—from the Japanese occupation of Korea (1910-1945) to the present—has always concerned itself with the colonial-modern reality of minjok, and that any Korean Christian political engagement must therefore take place within, and in response to, the discourse on minjok. This contention unfolds through discussions of two main aspects: 1) that the rise of nationalism and its exception-evoking posture toward the Constitution in early-2020s Korean politics can be addressed and responded to only through a theological recapitulation of minjok and its inextricable relationship to modern Korea's interpretative modes—adaptive, resistant, and negotiating—with respect to sovereignty; and 2) that understanding minjok as a theological subjectivity within Johann Baptist Metz's framework of a memorative-narrative structure offers a way for political theology to become distinctively "Korean" and highly relevant to ongoing discussions of state sovereignty and Christian action, despite the theoretical framework's Western and denominationally particular (Catholic) origin.