The Appeal Trial Has Accelerated

Published 08 Jul.2024 14:13(KST)

4845 Civil Appeal Filings in First Half of Year
19% Increase Compared to Same Period Last Year
11% Rise in Appellate Court Processing Compared to Last Year
First Step Taken to Resolve Trial Bottlenecks

Since Chief Justice Cho Hee-dae took office, the judiciary has been making every effort to resolve 'trial delays,' and it has been observed that the handling of appellate court cases is speeding up.

According to reporting by the Legal Times, the appeal rate for civil substantive cases in the first half of this year (January to May) was 18.87%, showing little difference compared to last year (18.42%). However, the number of cases filed at the Supreme Court (4845 cases) increased by 763 cases, a rise of 18.69% compared to the same period last year (4082 cases). This is analyzed as a significant increase in cases reaching the Supreme Court due to faster processing of appellate court cases (High Court appeals and District Court appeals). Some view this as a positive first step toward resolving trial delays, a long-standing goal of the judiciary.

[Image source=Beomryul Newspaper]

Inside and outside the courts, the main reason cited for the increase in Supreme Court filings is the higher processing rate of appellate court cases.

Analysis of the appellate court processing rate (cases processed relative to cases filed) shows that in the first half of last year, it was 93.44% (21,388 cases filed, 19,984 cases processed), whereas in the first half of this year, it rose by 8.12 percentage points to 101.56% (21,854 cases filed, 22,196 cases processed). While the number of cases filed increased by 2.18%, the number of cases processed rose by 11.07%. Meanwhile, the appeal rate was 6.64% in the first half of 2023 and 6.38% this year, showing little difference.

A judge at a district court said, “Although the appeal rate itself has not changed much, the increase in Supreme Court filings can be analyzed as a result of more cases being processed at the appellate level,” adding, “This is a very encouraging phenomenon and a positive signal for resolving trial delays in the future.”

Meanwhile, first-instance trials (panel, single judge, and small claims) have also generally been processed slightly faster. The total number of first-instance filings this year was 337,995 cases, a 3.56% increase compared to last year (326,370 cases), but the overall processing rate rose by 0.53 percentage points to 89.19% this year from 88.66% in the same period last year.

However, in the case of first-instance panel trials, the number of filings increased significantly by 15.98%, from 10,531 cases last year to 12,214 cases this year, causing the processing rate to drop considerably from 116.97% in the first half of last year to 92.72% this year. Regarding the decrease in the panel processing rate, it is pointed out that since March 2022, when the jurisdictional monetary threshold distinguishing single judge and panel trials in civil litigation was raised from 200 million KRW to 500 million KRW, the number of panel trials has decreased while single judge trials have increased, leading to adjustments in the number of trial benches. Therefore, it is necessary to observe the trend from a long-term perspective.

‘Increase in Judges’ to Resolve the Growing Number of Supreme Court Cases

As the number of Supreme Court filings increases, concerns are also rising about the excessive workload of the Supreme Court’s new case review division.

The workload perceived by judicial researchers has increased by about 20%, inevitably adding to their burden. However, even if reinforcement of the research office staff is needed, given the current atmosphere in the National Assembly, it is uncertain when the ‘Judge Increase Act’ will be passed, making it difficult to expand the research office immediately.

During the 21st National Assembly, a bill to sequentially increase the number of judges by 370 over five years to resolve trial delays?the ‘Act on the Number of Judges in Courts of All Levels’?was proposed. However, it only passed the bill subcommittee and was automatically discarded without reaching the plenary session due to the aftermath of the special prosecutor situation.

A presiding judge said, “It is positive that many cases are being filed at the Supreme Court as appellate court work becomes more active, but the increasing workload of judicial researchers is a concern,” adding, “To maintain this positive trend, manpower must be reinforced not only in frontline courts but also in the research office through an increase in judges.”