LATEST DECISIONS
-
- 2023Hun-Ma1175
-
Final decision : nonconforming to the Constitution
Decision date : Aug 27, 2026 -
On August 27, 2026, the Court, in a 5 (nonconforming to the Constitution) to 2 (unconstitutional) to 2 (rejected) decision, held that the portion of Article 76, Section (1) of the Military Service Act providing that “an employer shall dismiss a person falling under Item 2 if such person is employed” does not conform to the Constitution and shall continue to apply until the legislature amends it by February 29, 2028.
Two Justices (Justices Jung Jungmi and Cho Hanchang) filed an opinion for rejection, expressing the view that the above provision of the Military Service Act does not infringe freedom of occupational choice of persons subject to military service.
more
-
- 2022Hun-Ma255
-
Final decision : upheld (unconstitutionality confirmed), dismissed
Decision date : Aug 27, 2026 -
On August 27, 2026, a unanimous Court held unconstitutional the legislative failure to provide for the birth registration, under the law of the Republic of Korea, of foreign nationals born in the Republic of Korea.
However, the Court dismissed both the claim filed by the father Complainant against the above legislative inaction and the claims filed by Complainants (the father and his minor child) against the portion “citizen” in Articles 1, 2, and 3, Article 4, Section (1), and Article 8, Section (2) of the Framework Act on Education and against Article 19, Section (2) of the Enforcement Decree of the Elementary and Secondary Education Act.
more
-
- 2023Hun-Ba274, 2023Hun-Ba351 (consolidated)
-
Final decision : constitutional
Decision date : Jul 23, 2026 -
On July 23, 2026, a unanimous Court held that the following provisions are not in violation of the Constitution insofar as they provide that the rescission of a gift contract does not have any effect in respect of any portion as to which performance has already been completed: 1) the portion of Article 558 of the Civil Act concerning Article 555, which applies this rule to the rescission of a gift contract not made in writing; and 2) the portion of Article 558 of the Civil Act concerning Article 557, which applies this rule to the rescission of a gift contract due to a change in the donor’s financial condition.
The Court also held, in a 5 (constitutional) to 4 (unconstitutional) decision, that 3) the portion of Article 558 of the Civil Act concerning Article 556, Section (1), Item 2, which provides that the rescission of a gift contract due to the donee’s failure to perform the duty to support the donor does not have any effect in respect of any portion as to which performance has already been completed, is not in violation of the Constitution.
Four Justices (Justices Kim Sanghwan, Kim Hyungdu, Ma Eunhyeok, and Oh Young-joon) dissented, expressing the view that the above-mentioned portion of Article 558 of the Civil Act concerning Article 556, Section (1), Item 2, which limits the effect of rescission due to the donee’s failure to perform the duty to support the donor, is unconstitutional.
more
