LATEST DECISIONS
-
- 2023Hun-Ka14
-
Final decision : unconstitutional
Decision date : Mar 26, 2026 -
On March 26, 2026, a unanimous Court held unconstitutional the portion of Article 85 of the former Military Service Act (amended by Act No. 15054 on November 28, 2017 and before amendment by Act No. 20643 on January 7, 2025) concerning the case where a person who, having a duty under Article 6 to deliver a notice of call-up for military mobilization training, fails to deliver the notice without justifiable grounds. That provision criminally penalizes a person who, in the absence of a person liable for military service, receives the notice and, having a duty to deliver it to that person, fails to do so without justifiable grounds.
more
-
- 2021Hun-Ba168, 2024Hun-Ba276, 2025Hun-Ba193 (consolidated)
-
Final decision : nonconforming to the Constitution, constitutional
Decision date : Feb 26, 2026 -
On February 26, 2026, the Court issued the following rulings on provisions of the “Assembly and Demonstration Act” (the “ADA”) that impose a prior notification requirement for outdoor assemblies and provide for criminal punishment, without exception, for violations of that requirement.
1. Punishment Provision
In a 4 (nonconforming to the Constitution) to 4 (unconstitutional) to 1 (constitutional) decision, the Court held that Article 22, Section (2) of the ADA, insofar as it pertains to the portion of Article 6, Section (1) concerning an outdoor assembly, infringes freedom of assembly and is nonconforming to the Constitution. The provision imposes criminal punishment, uniformly and without exception, for violations of the prior notification requirement for outdoor assemblies. The Court ordered that the provision remain applicable until it is amended by August 31, 2027.
One Justice (Justice Cho Hanchang) filed a dissenting opinion, expressing the view that the provision does not violate the principle of proportionality between crime and punishment or the principle of equality.
2. Notification Provision
The Court, in a 7-to-2 decision, held that the portion of the main clause of Article 6, Section (1) of the ADA concerning an outdoor assembly does not violate the Constitution. The provision imposes the prior notification requirement for outdoor assemblies.
Two Justices (Justices Kim Bok-hyeong and Ma Eunhyeok) filed a dissenting opinion, expressing the view that the provision infringes freedom of assembly and is unconstitutional.
more
-
- 2023Hun-Ma370
-
Final decision : upheld (unconstitutionality confirmed)
Decision date : Jan 29, 2026 -
On January 29, 2026, a unanimous Court held that the act of Respondent, the warden of Jeju Prison, in refusing on February 18, 2023, on the ground that it was Saturday night, to permit an attorney visit requested by counsel for Complainant, who sought to file a petition for review of the legality of his arrest, infringed the arrestee Complainant’s right to the assistance of counsel and was therefore unconstitutional.
more
