Landmark Cases on ExcellentWiki - Legal Encyclopedia

2004 Presidential Impeachment of Roh Moo-hyun

Tue, 07 Jul 2026 00:00:00 +0000

Introduction

The 2004 impeachment of President Roh Moo-hyun (노무현) was the first presidential impeachment in South Korean history. The National Assembly voted to impeach President Roh on March 12, 2004, on charges of election law violations, economic mismanagement, and corruption. The Constitutional Court of Korea, exercising its impeachment jurisdiction for the first time, rejected the impeachment on May 14, 2004, reinstating the President. The case established foundational precedents for the constitutional impeachment process.

2016 Presidential Impeachment of Park Geun-hye

Tue, 07 Jul 2026 00:00:00 +0000

Introduction

The 2016–2017 impeachment of President Park Geun-hye (박근혜) was a watershed moment in South Korean constitutional history. Following massive candlelight demonstrations calling for her resignation, the National Assembly impeached President Park on December 9, 2016. The Constitutional Court unanimously upheld the impeachment on March 10, 2017, removing her from office — the first time a South Korean president was constitutionally removed. The case (2016Hun-Na1) represents the most significant application of presidential impeachment under the 1987 Constitution.

Conscientious Objection and Alternative Service (2018)

Tue, 07 Jul 2026 00:00:00 +0000

Introduction

The Constitutional Court’s 2018 conscientious objection decision (2011Hun-Ba379) marked a transformative moment in South Korean constitutional law. The Court, reversing its 2004 precedent, held that the Military Service Act (병역법) violated freedom of conscience (Article 19 of the Constitution) by failing to provide alternative civilian service for conscientious objectors. The decision required legislative action by December 31, 2019, leading to the 2020 amendment establishing a 36-month alternative service program.

Same-Sex Partnership Rights Litigation

Tue, 07 Jul 2026 00:00:00 +0000

Introduction

Same-sex partnership rights in South Korea have been advanced primarily through litigation before the Constitutional Court and Supreme Court. While the Constitution does not explicitly address same-sex marriage, Article 36 provides that “marriage and family shall be entered into and founded on the basis of individual dignity and equality of the sexes.” Landmark decisions in 2024 by the Supreme Court regarding spousal health insurance benefits and ongoing constitutional complaints have significantly advanced LGBTQ+ rights in Korean law.

Prosecutorial Investigation Rights Reform (2019–2020)

Tue, 07 Jul 2026 00:00:00 +0000

Introduction

The 2019–2020 prosecutorial investigation rights litigation was a defining legal and political battle in South Korea, centering on the prosecution’s traditional power to direct criminal investigations. The dispute involved the Act on the Investigation of Corruption Crimes and the Establishment of the Corruption Investigation Office (CIO Act) , amendments to the Criminal Procedure Code limiting prosecutorial investigation authority, and multiple constitutional complaints challenging these reforms. The controversy reflected deep tensions between prosecutorial independence and democratic accountability.

Comfort Women Agreement Constitutionality

Tue, 07 Jul 2026 00:00:00 +0000

Introduction

The “comfort women” (위안부) issue — involving the forced sexual slavery of Korean women by the Imperial Japanese Army during World War II — has generated significant constitutional litigation in South Korea. The 2015 agreement between South Korea and Japan, which purported to settle the issue “finally and irreversibly,” was challenged before the Constitutional Court as violating the victims’ fundamental rights. Related litigation has addressed the constitutionality of the agreement and the state’s duty to protect the rights of former comfort women.

Military Service Act Alternative Service (2018)

Tue, 07 Jul 2026 00:00:00 +0000

Introduction

The Constitutional Court’s 2018 decision on alternative military service (2011Hun-Ba379) fundamentally restructured South Korea’s military conscription system. The Court held that the Military Service Act (병역법) violated Article 19 (freedom of conscience) by failing to provide alternative civilian service for conscientious objectors. This article examines the specific constitutional reasoning, the legislative response, and the ongoing implementation of alternative service.

Constitutional Framework

Article 19 — Freedom of Conscience

The Constitution provides: “All citizens shall enjoy freedom of conscience.” The Constitutional Court had previously interpreted this as protecting the freedom to form and act according to moral or religious convictions. In its 2004 decision (2002Hun-Ba1), the Court had held that military service obligations did not infringe this freedom because national security constituted a compelling state interest.

Sewol Ferry Disaster Litigation

Tue, 07 Jul 2026 00:00:00 +0000

Introduction

The Sewol Ferry disaster (세월호 침몰사고) of April 16, 2014, in which 304 passengers — primarily high school students from Danwon High School — lost their lives, generated one of the most extensive and complex litigation campaigns in Korean legal history. The disaster gave rise to criminal prosecutions of the ferry captain and crew, corporate officers of Chonghaejin Marine, and government officials; civil damages actions by victims’ families; constitutional complaints regarding the state’s rescue failures; and the landmark Sewol Act (세월호특별법).