Election Litigation Filing Fee Imposition and Constitutional Petition on Supreme Court's Single Instance System

The Supreme Court dismissed the nullification lawsuit regarding the Gyeongnam Superintendent of Education election held in June last year.

The Korea Election Fraud Monitoring Council and the Barun Election Gyeongnam Residents' Association held a press conference at the Gyeongnam Office of Education briefing room on the 16th, announcing that the nullification lawsuit for the Gyeongnam Superintendent of Education election filed in August last year was dismissed on the 12th.

The council and others claimed that one justice played three roles during the lawsuit process.

"In this case, Justice A served as the Chairman of the Central Election Commission, overseeing the integrated management of the election, decided to dismiss the election complaint as the chairman, and also participated in the trial as a replacement justice due to changes in the bench," they said.

"We found it difficult to expect fairness in the trial and filed a motion to disqualify Justice A, but it was not accepted, and Justice A did not recuse himself from the trial," they added. "We are curious why Justice A's name was omitted from the list of justices in the judgment."

"We urge the Election Commission to conduct a fair and lawful investigation and take appropriate measures in election management," they said. "We plan to launch an impeachment petition campaign against Justice A."

They also plan to file a constitutional complaint regarding the election lawsuit filing fee and the implementation of a single-instance system.

The council explained, "The election lawsuit filing fee is 20 times that of the initial trial, and making the plaintiff bear this cost is effectively a barrier to filing lawsuits." They added, "It is also unconstitutional that election lawsuits end with a single instance at the Supreme Court, making it impossible to check erroneous rulings by the Supreme Court."

"We will petition the National Assembly to introduce supplementary measures to prevent excessive filing of election lawsuits instead of imposing excessive filing fees and election lawsuit cost reimbursement systems, similar to the candidate deposit system and election expense reimbursement system," they said.

The Korea Election Fraud Monitoring Council and the Barun Election Gyeongnam Residents' Association are holding a press conference at the Gyeongnam Office of Education regarding the Supreme Court ruling on the invalidation lawsuit of the Gyeongnam Superintendent of Education election.
[Photo by Lee Seryeong]

Earlier, the council and others filed a lawsuit against Superintendent Park Jong-hoon, a candidate in the Gyeongnam Superintendent of Education election during the nationwide simultaneous local elections in June, alleging violations such as ▲ Personal Information Protection Act violation ▲ dissemination of false information ▲ violation of prohibition of donation acts ▲ election campaigning using special relationships.

They filed an election complaint with the Central Election Commission on June 14 last year but received a dismissal, and then filed a lawsuit with the Supreme Court on August 12 of the same year.

They claimed that Superintendent Park disclosed the payment details of the Korean Teachers and Education Workers Union (Korean: JeonGyoJo) fees by candidate Kim Sang-kwon, stated in a TV debate that harmful videos could be viewed on student smart devices but denied this, distributed smart devices before the election, and showed election promotional videos for kitchen staff on the EduWith site.

They also said that a public opinion poll showed that 130,000 people changed their candidate choice after watching the TV debate where suspicions about candidate Kim’s membership in JeonGyoJo were raised, thus influencing the election.

According to the judgment, the Supreme Court panel stated, "It is only recognized that Superintendent Park stated in the TV debate that candidate Kim had paid JeonGyoJo fees," and did not acknowledge the other allegations raised by the council.

"Unless illegal acts during the election process are recognized against Superintendent Park, there is no reason to examine errors of omission or neglect," the court said. "Therefore, it is unnecessary to consider whether this influenced the election, and all claims are dismissed."

On the day, the council said, "The election nullification lawsuit ending in a single instance has concluded with this Supreme Court ruling." They added, "Although it is difficult to fully accept the ruling, including the court’s failure to process the case within 180 days, we hope Superintendent Park will responsibly and stably carry out Gyeongnam education administration."

This content was produced with the assistance of AI translation services.