Judgment Reviews Law at South Korea
In South Korea, the law for reviewing judgments and challenging administrative decisions is a key part of its legal system. The system is based on a three-tier court structure for most legal matters, complemented by a separate Constitutional Court that handles constitutional issues.
The Ordinary Court System (Appeals)
The general court system in South Korea handles civil, criminal, and administrative cases. The review of judgments within this system is primarily through the process of appeal. The structure is as follows:
District Courts: These are the courts of first instance. Cases are heard by a single judge or a panel of three judges, depending on the case's complexity and value.
High Courts: These courts hear appeals from decisions of the district courts. High courts review both questions of fact and law.
Supreme Court: As the highest court in the ordinary court system, the Supreme Court hears final appeals (known as sango appeals) from the High Courts. A key distinction is that the Supreme Court primarily reviews questions of law, not questions of fact. This means that a final appeal must be based on a claim that the lower court misapplied the law or that there was a legal error in the procedure.
Administrative Litigation
For decisions made by administrative bodies (e.g., government agencies), citizens can challenge them through a specific process known as administrative litigation. This is governed by the Administrative Litigation Act. The purpose of this act is to protect citizens from infringements on their rights or interests caused by illegal or improper administrative actions.
Key aspects of administrative litigation include:
Subject of Litigation: The litigation can be filed against a "disposition" by an administrative agency, which includes the exercise of or refusal to exercise public authority, as well as other equivalent administrative actions.
Types of Suits: The Administrative Litigation Act classifies administrative suits into several categories, including:
Revocation suits: To revoke or alter an illegal administrative disposition.
Suits for confirmation of nullity, etc.: To seek a court's confirmation that a disposition is either valid or invalid.
Suits for confirmation of illegality of an omission: To confirm the illegality of an administrative agency's failure to act when it had a legal obligation to do so.
Jurisdiction: The Administrative Court, which is a specialized court at the same level as the District Courts, typically has initial jurisdiction over administrative disputes.
Constitutional Review
South Korea has a unique system of judicial review with a powerful, separate Constitutional Court. This court is not part of the ordinary court hierarchy and has specific jurisdiction over major constitutional matters. It plays a critical role in reviewing the legality of laws and government actions based on the Constitution.
The Constitutional Court's powers include:
Constitutional Review of Statutes: The Court can determine whether a law is unconstitutional. This power is often exercised when an ordinary court, in the course of a trial, finds that a law relevant to its case may be unconstitutional and requests a ruling from the Constitutional Court.
Constitutional Complaint: A person whose fundamental rights have been violated by an official act of the government can file a "constitutional complaint" directly with the Constitutional Court after exhausting all other remedies.
Impeachment: The Court decides on the impeachment of high-ranking officials.
Dissolution of Political Parties: The Court has the power to dissolve a political party if its goals or activities are deemed unconstitutional.
In summary, South Korea's legal system provides multiple avenues for the review of judgments. A tiered appeal system allows for the correction of legal and factual errors in most civil and criminal cases. A specialized system of administrative litigation provides a remedy for illegal administrative decisions, and a separate Constitutional Court serves as the ultimate guardian of constitutional rights and the legality of legislation.
RELATED Blog
0 comments