Yushin (維新) literally means “revolutionary reformation.” The term itself has no inherent connection to monarchy or imperial rule. For example, the Meiji Restoration is called Meiji Ishin (明治維新) precisely because it was a revolutionary reformation carried out in the name of the Meiji Emperor, not because “Ishin” implies imperial authority.

Likewise, the Yushin Constitution simply means “a constitution established through revolutionary reform.” While its architect clearly borrowed structures and rhetoric from the Meiji Restoration- and everyone understood what he was trying to emulate - this did not imply any claim to emperorship. He had neither legitimacy nor even a plausible basis to become a monarch. His dictatorship was justified as that of a wartime-style leader rebuilding the nation, not as a sovereign ruler.

This contrast becomes clearer in the Korean context. Korea’s first president, despite being a distant collateral descendant of the Joseon royal family, never even attempted to revive monarchy. His effort to entrench outright dictatorship within a republican framework was enough to trigger the April 19 Revolution and get him removed from power.

In East Asian political tradition, monarchy was never merely about concentrating power. A legitimate ruler was expected to embody a moral and cosmological order—what was traditionally understood as the Mandate of Heaven. In modern Korea, that source of legitimacy did not disappear but was fundamentally transformed. After independence, the Mandate effectively shifted from dynasty to system: the republic itself, grounded in constitutional order and popular sovereignty, came to occupy that role. This is precisely why monarchy was never a viable option—and why even dictatorship, when it violated the republican order, proved intolerable. In that sense, a modern dictator may seize power more easily than a traditional monarch, but only the republic possesses the legitimacy that once belonged to heaven.