Former Supreme Court Justice's Stance on Court Appeals System Sparks Debate During Constitutional Court Chief Justice Confirmation

The Constitutional Crossroads: A Former Supreme Court Justice's Balanced Perspective

On July 21, 2025, Kim Sang-hwan, the nominee for Constitutional Court Chief Justice, faced intense scrutiny during his parliamentary confirmation hearing. His measured response to the contentious court appeals system (재판소원제) has captured significant attention from legal experts and political observers alike. The 59-year-old former Supreme Court Justice, who served for six years until December 2024, now finds himself at the center of a decades-old debate that could reshape Korea's judicial landscape.

Kim's unique position as someone who has served on both sides of this institutional divide - having worked as a Supreme Court Justice and now nominated to lead the Constitutional Court - makes his perspective particularly valuable. During the hearing, he emphasized the need to "carefully consider both advantages and disadvantages" and acknowledged that the system "could function as a de facto fourth trial level, which should be considered alongside its benefits". This nuanced approach reflects the complexity of bridging two institutions that have historically held opposing views on this critical issue.

Understanding the Court Appeals System Controversy

The court appeals system represents one of the most contentious issues in Korean judicial reform, allowing citizens to file constitutional complaints against court decisions with the Constitutional Court. This system would essentially enable the Constitutional Court to review Supreme Court rulings, creating what critics describe as a "fourth trial level". The debate has deep institutional roots, with the Supreme Court consistently opposing the system as unconstitutional due to its four-tier structure, while the Constitutional Court has maintained a welcoming stance since discussions began.

The controversy gained renewed momentum following the Supreme Court's decision to overturn President Lee Jae-myung's election law violation case in May 2025. The Democratic Party has since pushed for judicial reforms, including the court appeals system, as part of their broader agenda. Critics argue this timing suggests political motivation, with some legal experts claiming the reform is designed to create an "optical illusion" that the Supreme Court's ruling against Lee was incorrect. The system's implementation could fundamentally alter the balance of power between Korea's two highest judicial institutions.

Kim Sang-hwan's Diplomatic Balancing Act

During his confirmation hearing, Kim demonstrated remarkable diplomatic skill in addressing this sensitive issue. Unlike his predecessor candidate Oh Young-jun, who expressed clear support for the system and argued that "calling it a fourth trial is not accurate," Kim adopted a more cautious tone. He characterized the dispute as having "37 years of history" and expressed satisfaction that "the issue that needs resolution is finally being discussed".

Kim's approach represents a significant shift from his previous position. In past statements, he had argued that implementing the court appeals system required constitutional amendment rather than simple legislation. However, during the hearing, he softened this stance, stating that "while constitutional amendment was my personal position, theoretically, it's difficult to say any single view is overwhelmingly valid". This evolution in his thinking suggests a more pragmatic approach to the role, acknowledging the political realities while maintaining judicial independence.

Community Reactions: Divided Opinions on Judicial Reform

Online communities have shown mixed reactions to Kim's nomination and his stance on judicial reform. Progressive communities generally support his balanced approach, viewing it as necessary pragmatism in a politically charged environment. Many users on platforms like Nate and DC Inside have praised his diplomatic handling of controversial questions, particularly his refusal to provide definitive positions on politically sensitive cases.

Conservative communities, however, remain skeptical of Kim's progressive background, particularly his involvement with liberal judicial organizations such as the International Human Rights Law Research Association. Some critics have labeled him as part of the "progressive judicial elite" and questioned whether his appointment represents political payback for his previous favorable rulings regarding President Lee Jae-myung. The "gap investment expert" controversy, referring to his real estate investments, has also drawn criticism from conservative voices who question his financial ethics.

The Broader Context of Judicial Reform

Kim's nomination occurs within a broader context of proposed judicial reforms by the Democratic Party government. Beyond the court appeals system, the party is also pushing for significant expansion of the Supreme Court, potentially increasing the number of justices to as many as 100. Kim has expressed reservations about this expansion, arguing that improvements should begin with first-instance courts rather than the Supreme Court level.

His position on Supreme Court expansion reflects a more conservative approach to institutional change: "The fundamental issue requires dramatic quantitative and qualitative expansion of first-instance courts, designing a pyramid structure for the court system". This perspective aligns with concerns that rapid expansion without proper foundation could undermine judicial quality and efficiency. Kim's emphasis on building from the ground up demonstrates his understanding of systemic judicial challenges beyond high-profile political cases.

Addressing Past Controversies and Future Challenges

During the hearing, Kim also addressed criticism of his past rulings, particularly a 2007 case where he sentenced a high school teacher who sexually assaulted a minor to probation rather than imprisonment. He acknowledged that "from the perspective of enhanced sentencing standards based on gender sensitivity, this could be viewed as a significantly inadequate ruling," showing his willingness to accept criticism and demonstrate growth.

Kim's handling of questions about President Lee's election law case was notably cautious. When asked about the Supreme Court's decision to overturn the case, he deflected by stating he "was not involved in the deliberation" and that it would be "inappropriate to provide specific evaluation". This careful approach suggests his awareness of the political sensitivities surrounding his nomination while maintaining appropriate judicial discretion.

Looking Forward: Implications for Korea's Constitutional Court

Kim Sang-hwan's eventual confirmation as Constitutional Court Chief Justice - which occurred on July 23, 2025, with 206 votes in favor out of 264 total votes - marks a significant moment in Korean judicial history. His appointment makes him the first former Supreme Court Justice to lead the Constitutional Court in 12 years, since Lee Kang-guk served from 2007 to 2013.

His balanced approach to controversial issues like the court appeals system may help bridge the institutional divide between the Supreme Court and Constitutional Court. However, critics remain concerned about the potential for political influence, given his previous rulings favorable to the current administration. As the Constitutional Court returns to its full nine-member composition, Kim's leadership will be crucial in maintaining institutional independence while navigating an increasingly politicized judicial environment. The success of his tenure will largely depend on his ability to maintain the delicate balance he demonstrated during his confirmation hearing - respecting both institutional perspectives while serving the broader interests of Korean democracy and rule of law.