Criticism has erupted from those in the legal profession that this bill, which will have a major impact on the legal system, has been rushed through without sufficient discussion.
The need for a resolution has been pointed out for some time, and there are voices calling for the Ministry of Justice to show its willingness to resolve the issue.
The bill to amend the Supreme Court's Constitution was passed. The bill will postpone the implementation for one year, but the main points of the bill are to increase the number of Supreme Court justices from the current 14 to 30 by four each year for four years.
The law is expected to go into effect after a vote at the Legislation and Judicial Affairs Committee general meeting, a vote at the plenary session, and approval and promulgation by the president.
"Increasing the number of Supreme Court justices to 30 is an act that destroys the judicial system. It seems that they are trying to move to a German system, but it is not compatible with the current Korean court system," he said.
The judge said, "Some people say that the increase in the number of Supreme Court justices will lead to the 'specialization' of smaller divisions (judicial bodies with fewer judges), but currently, Korean judges handle all cases, including criminal, civil, administrative, and family cases.
"They are 'generalists' who specialize in the legal profession. It is not a system that trains specialist judges like Germany," he said. Those who argue for a large increase in the number of Supreme Court justices cite the example of Germany.
The number of Supreme Court justices in Germany is about 350, but the breakdown is very different from that in Korea. In Germany, the first and second instances are handled by the state courts, and the appeals are handled by the Federal Court.
The Federal Court is divided into five areas: Federal Administrative Court, Federal Financial Court, Federal Labor Court, and Federal Social Court, and there is also a Federal Constitutional Court.
Judges are appointed for life to state or federal courts and are structured to specialize in a particular field.
The Federal Court of Appeals is divided into two branches, the Federal Court of Appeals and the Federal Court of Appeals, which handles civil and criminal cases, has the most chief judges with 19, and the number of chief judges in the Federal Court is thought to be around 60 in total. This is the same as the number of chief judges in the Supreme Court of Korea.
Another current Chief Judge said, "It is not fair to proceed with such an important case that could change the entire judicial system without a public hearing or any input from the judges.
"To ordinary citizens, this will only be seen as 'retaliation.'" He added, "The delay in processing cases is not due to a small number of Supreme Court justices, but because there are too many appeals and the Supreme Court justices are not able to handle the cases.
"This is to thoroughly examine all cases. This is not an issue that should be dealt with hastily, to the point of shelving other alternatives such as an appeals leave system, an appellate court, or an appellate division of the high court," he said.
The backlog of appeals has been a long-standing issue for the Supreme Court. Since the abolition of the appeals permission system in 1990, the number of cases has exploded in the past 30 years.
The number of cases appealed to the Supreme Court is estimated at 40,000 to 50,000, with each Supreme Court justice handling 4,000 to 5,000 cases as the chief judge.
A separate committee was established to conduct research, and in January 2023, it presented a legislative opinion that the number of Supreme Court justices should be increased by four, subject to the introduction of a system of permission for appeals.
There is also a deep-rooted concern that an increase in the number of Supreme Court justices will lead to a decline in the quality of first and second instance court cases.
The Supreme Court consists of 14 Supreme Court justices, including the Chief Justice, and over 100 Supreme Court judicial researchers. The Supreme Court judicial researchers are veterans with more than 15 years of experience as judges, and the Supreme Court justices are
Based on the report, the court will decide whether to close the case or whether additional hearings are necessary. A former Supreme Court judicial researcher said, "The number of judicial researchers should be increased according to the number of Supreme Court justices.
"If that were to happen, it would be like 'pulling out the stone at the bottom to support the stone at the top,' and with veteran judges concentrating in the Supreme Court, there is a risk that the quality of first and second instance trials experienced by the general public will decline."
He also said, "If the number of judicial researchers remains the same, the quality of Supreme Court cases will inevitably decline. This is a dilemma that cannot be resolved without a long-term increase in the number of judges and their training."
"The Supreme Court also has the role of ensuring uniformity in legal interpretation. If the Supreme Court has 30 justices, it will be inevitable that its collegial function will be weakened," he said.
On the other hand, there are many people outside the court who support increasing the number of Supreme Court justices.
The legal profession places importance on the "right of the people to a trial" and has consistently maintained a firm stance in opposing an increase in the number of Supreme Court justices and the introduction of an appeals permission system.
Academic circles also share a similar stance. They agree that an increase in the number of Supreme Court justices is necessary to eliminate delays in trials and to diversify the composition of the Supreme Court justices.
However, some have pointed out that in practice, the Supreme Court's four-judge division is the center of power.
Professor Lu said, "The current Supreme Court trial system cannot be said to be the judicial system that the public expects. In fact, most precedents are formed in the subdivision, and even in the subdivision, the judge in charge is a one-person court.
"The conclusions reached by an en banc panel are less than 0.1%. I have doubts about whether the Supreme Court has been operating an appellate court with an en banc panel as the Supreme Court.
In fact, the Supreme Court's full bench only issues rulings on about 10 to 20 cases per year.
"We have been discussing ways to improve the system, but there are also strong demands for an increase in the number of Supreme Court justices. We need to look at examples from other countries, such as Germany, to consider how to actually manage the system once the number of Supreme Court justices is increased."
Meanwhile, Supreme Court Chief Justice Cho Hee-dae told reporters when he arrived to work on the same day, "We will hold a public debate on the original function of the Supreme Court and the direction of reorganization that is desirable for the people.
"I hope that a forum for this kind of discussion will be created. I will explain the situation to the Diet and cooperate with them," he said.
2025/06/06 06:24 KST
Copyrights(C) Herald wowkorea.jp 104