Latest news with #ConstitutionalCourtofKorea
13-05-2025
- Politics
The US-Japan-ROK Trilateral After Yoon: Japan's and Korea's Security Choices in the Trump 2.0 Era
In August 2023 a historic summit of leaders from South Korea, Japan, and the United States was held at Camp David. Now that all three nations are under new leadership, with the next Korean president to be chosen on June 3, how Donald Trump, Ishiba Shigeru, and the new leader in Seoul will approach trilateral ties will determine their relationship's future in this uncertain security environment. Japan-Korea Strategic Cooperation: Essential, Not Optional South Korean President Yoon Suk Yeol's imposition of martial law on December 3, 2024, precipitated a train of events that have raised grave concerns in Japan and globally about political stability in Korea. First, the South Korean National Assembly impeached President Yoon on December 14, at which point presidential duties were transferred to Prime Minister Han Duck-soo. Han was then himself impeached on December 27, resulting in Deputy Prime Minister and Minister of Economy and Finance Choi Sang-mok taking over the role of acting president. Han returned to the role on March 24 following his acquittal by the Constitutional Court of Korea. However, the same court then upheld the original impeachment of President Yoon on April 4, triggering an election to choose a new president. The current political vacuum is set to last until that election on June 3. At that point, South Korea's 'national crisis' will have extended for more than six months. The lack of both domestic and high-level diplomatic leadership could not have come at a worse time, given the return of Donald Trump to the American presidency and his administration's subsequent imposition of tariffs on the highly export-dependent nation. Japan has paid close attention to events during this period of instability and the absence of stable South Korean leadership. The Japanese government has provided resolute diplomatic support to South Korea and coordinated closely with the government in Seoul. Tokyo and Seoul have also not hesitated to push forward on closer Japan-ROK and US-ROK-Japan cooperation in the meantime. In a March 21, 2025, written response to questions from the Asahi Shimbun, South Korean Minister of Foreign Affairs Cho Tae-yul expressed appreciation to Japan and other countries that provided encouragement and support during a difficult time for the ROK, and expressed 'sincere gratitude' to Minister of Foreign Affairs Iwaya Takeshi for his decision to visit Korea in January earlier this year. When South Korea's constitutional court finalized Yoon's impeachment on April 4, Japanese Prime Minister Ishiba Shigeru was quick to affirm that 'this year marks the sixtieth anniversary of the restoration of ROK-Japan relations. Regardless of the circumstances, we are going to make close cooperation between Japan and South Korea one of our top priorities.' What is behind this strengthened emphasis on Japan-Korea relations at such a delicate time? One reason is that constructive relations between Seoul and Tokyo are strategically more vital than ever to the respective government's diplomacy and security. Echoing former Prime Minister Kishida Fumio's sentiment that 'Today's Ukraine may be tomorrow's East Asia,' Cho also recognized the implications of the challenging international situation and current 'tectonic shifts' in the geopolitical environment. To this end, the foreign minister noted that 'the peoples of the two nations must firmly realize that cooperation is not an option but absolutely essential.' A High Point in Trilateral Relations Building on the improved bilateral relationship, in recent years Seoul and Tokyo have also pushed forward on trilateral strategic cooperation with the United States. While cooperation dates back to the Korean War in 1950, the first US-ROK-Japan summit, held in 1994 on the sidelines of the Asia Pacific Economic Cooperation forum in Jakarta, represented the first effort at officializing trilateral cooperation tying together two of the United States' most important regional bilateral alliances. In 2019, near the end of the first Donald Trump administration, diplomatic developments threatened to unravel trilateral cooperation. Against the backdrop of the US-China strategic competition, the US State Department and Pentagon had invested significant energy into enhancing 'Indo-Pacific' strategic partnerships such as the Quad (Japan, the United States, India, Australia) and the trilateral with Japan and Korea. President Trump was more interested in engaging in dialogue with North Korean leader Kim Jong-un. The progressive leader of South Korea at the time, President Moon Jae-in, also prioritized North-South dialogue over strategic cooperation with allies and partners. The sudden shift in diplomatic priorities between the three countries also overlapped with a historical nadir in bilateral ROK-Japan relations. Over the two-year period of 2018–19, bilateral tensions broke out over the issue of compensation for wartime Korean laborers, Japan's tightening of export controls on South Korea, Seoul's announcement of the suspension of the GSOMIA information sharing agreement, and an incident where Japanese authorities complained that an ROK naval vessel directed its fire-control radar at a Japanese Maritime Self-Defense Force patrol aircraft. Domestic sentiment in both countries toward the other soured considerably. As these wide-ranging diplomatic, economic, and national security issues were unfolding between two critical American allies, President Trump made no effort to mediate. This situation was transformed, however, with changes in the leadership in both Washington DC and Seoul. Inaugurated in 2022, South Korean President Yoon Suk Yeol was particularly proactive in restoring ROK-Japan relations, while Yoon and Trump's successor, President Joe Biden, were eager to enhance bilateral US-ROK and trilateral US-ROK-Japan security cooperation. Japanese Prime Minister Kishida responded positively to such overtures, leading to the August 2023 US-Japan-Korea summit meeting that produced the 'Camp David Principles'—the first-ever stand-alone summit held among the three countries. The Camp David meeting was groundbreaking not only for spelling out the strategic importance of deepened security coordination, but also for broadening the focus of trilateral cooperation beyond the traditional focus on North Korean and Korean Peninsula issues. The reinvigorated trilateral relationship was positioned by the leaders as one of the core institutions underpinning the three nations' Indo-Pacific strategy—with an eye on China. Responding to Russia's invasion of Ukraine, the three countries also committed themselves to upholding the rule of law, common values, and the international order. Beyond the geopolitical realm, the three leaders agreed at Camp David to forge a 'comprehensive partnership' to address and coordinate on issues such as economic and technological security, development assistance, and climate change. A 'Trilateral Coordinating Secretariat' was also established to promote consultation and implement shared commitments, to further institutionalize the trilateral relationship. In hindsight, the Camp David years were a result of a rare coincidence of events and leaders that moved the wheels of history. Adapting to Trump 2.0: The China-Taiwan Challenge The inauguration of the second Trump administration in January 2025 raised concerns about the sustainability of the trilateral relationship, but so far, the framework has been sustained. The Joint Leaders' Statement released on February 7, following Prime Minister Ishiba's visit to Washington DC for his first official meeting with President Trump, omitted 'Camp David,' but mentioned that 'the two leaders intend to advance multilayered and aligned cooperation among likeminded countries,' noting the importance of the Quad and the US-ROK-Japan, US-Japan-Australia, and US-Japan-Philippines trilaterals. The Japanese and American leaders also 'affirmed the importance of the Japan-US-ROK trilateral partnership,' particularly in addressing North Korea–related issues. Two foreign-minister-level meetings have subsequently taken place among the trilateral partners, suggesting that the Trump administration will preserve the trilateral framework forged under the previous administration for the time being. Prime Minister Ishiba Shigeru (left) receives a commemorative gift from President Donald Trump at a joint press conference following the US-Japan summit, April 7, 2025, in Washington DC. (© Jiji) The relationship, however, is likely to be shaped to meet the priorities of the Trump administration. One of these is Washington's 'China-Taiwan shift' as it relates to the US Indo-Pacific strategy. Attitudes toward foreign affairs in the Trump administration can be roughly divided into two factions. One faction is represented by Vice President JD Vance, who has been described as a 'soft isolationist' when it comes to the commitment of American military forces overseas. Another faction contains traditional Republicans who support a hardline stance against American strategic rivals like China and tend to be more alliance-oriented. The latter group includes National Security Advisor Mike Waltz and Under Secretary of Defense for Policy Elbridge Colby. Both factions demand that allies bear their share of the burden and aim for the United States to take a focused approach to strategic competition and foreign affairs. While there is significant debate over the American defense posture as it relates to Ukraine and Europe, there is no sign of a desire to withdraw or reduce US forces in the Indo-Pacific. The United States may well strengthen its Indo-Pacific military posture—predicated on cooperation and increased burden sharing from allies and like-minded countries. How this relates to China and Taiwan is reflected in the US Department of Defense's Interim National Defense Strategic Guidance, as detailed by the Washington Post on March 29, 2025. In the document, Secretary of Defense Pete Hegseth identifies China as 'the Department's sole pacing threat, and denial of a Chinese fait accompli seizure of Taiwan . . . [as] the Department's sole pacing scenario.' This points to a China-Taiwan-related contingency as the focus of force planning, considering the much-discussed '2027' timeline regarding preparations for a Chinese invasion of Taiwan. As the United States focuses on potential conflict with China, most of the burden for deterrence measures against Russia, Iran, and North Korea will fall on allies in Europe, the Middle East, and East Asia. If the Interim Guidelines are followed through, the US alliances with Korea and Japan and the trilateral partnership will face greater challenges. The 'complex contingency' scenario in which a Korea contingency is interlocked with a Taiwan contingency has been an issue, but due to its sensitivities, official talks regarding the division of roles for the three partners have not progressed. Seoul in particular would be further concerned by the prioritization of a Taiwan contingency as the 'sole pacing scenario' and its implications for the Korean Peninsula. There is also a lack of clarity about whether President Trump will embrace the US-ROK Nuclear Consultative Group established under his predecessor. The NCG was established to reassure Seoul about the United States' commitment to extended deterrence through the nuclear umbrella in the face of an increasingly capable North Korean nuclear weapons and missile development program. The aforementioned Interim Guidance also stimulated South Korean concerns that past discussions about 'strategic flexibility' will re-emerge and result in the reduction of American troops on the peninsula, or the deployment of United States Forces Korea to other areas of the Indo-Pacific, leaving the ROK potentially vulnerable. These worries have further complicated discussions about the long-delayed transfer of wartime operational control of Korean military forces under the US-ROK Combined Forces Command from an American to a Korean commander. The US-Japan alliance also faces a similar dilemma of how to balance its response to Taiwan and Korean Peninsula contingencies while ensuring that Japan remains appropriately protected. Additionally, the United States is seeking cooperation from its allies in a wide range of areas with a view to enhancing deterrence against China. In addition to joint exercises and operational cooperation, the United States wants to see the establishment of integrated logistics and industrial supply chains that would include US Navy ships to receive better access to MRO (maintenance, repair, and overhaul) and replenishment while deployed to the region. Cooperation among allies on shipbuilding is also a focus for the Trump administration, given the current limited capacity of the United States' own industry. This was made clear in the joint statement released following a foreign-minister-level trilateral meeting in Brussels on April 3. While the issue had previously been raised at the July 2024 trilateral meeting, the three sides at Brussels recognized the need to collectively maintain 'a modern maritime fleet, a robust shipbuilding industry, and a strong workforce.' Making progress in defense logistics and industrial integration will also require cooperation with the Philippines, as well as with Australia and Britain through the AUKUS initiative. If successful, deepened industrial and logistical cooperation between regional allies and the United States could contribute to avoiding war with China over Taiwan by enhancing deterrence. President Trump's deal-focused style of transactional diplomacy, however, will continue to pose risks by exposing allies to sudden geopolitical changes. Trump continues to express interest in dialogue with Kim Jong-un, which would likely result in Japan and South Korea being sidelined. Trump's attachment to tariffs to address perceived economic imbalances, meanwhile, undermines the principles of free trade, but can also become an obstacle to enhanced industrial and defense supply chain cooperation. There is clearly a pressing need to discuss these issues from both economic and national security points of view and restore stability to Indo-Pacific strategic relationships. Tokyo and Seoul should make use of the Trilateral Coordinating Secretariat, among other mechanisms, to push forward policy coordination and ensure dialogue on regional security hotspots. South Korea's Choice: Is a Center Shift Possible? Another factor that will have a major impact on the sustainability of trilateral US-ROK-Japan strategic coordination is the domestic political situation in South Korea. During his short presidency, Yoon Suk Yeol committed Seoul to a much more ambitious foreign policy based on his vision of South Korea as a 'Global Pivotal State.' In this vision, Yoon positioned the US-ROK alliance as the main pillar of South Korea's foreign policy. In terms of South Korea's role in US strategic competition with China, the former president also moved Seoul's position away from 'strategic ambiguity'—as pursued under the Moon administration—to one of 'strategic clarity.' Describing Korean security interests as going beyond the peninsula, Yoon quickly moved to widen Seoul's strategic vision. He adopted a Korean version of the Indo-Pacific strategy, committed South Korea to maintaining peace and stability across the Taiwan Strait, and committed to the principles agreed to at the Camp David Summit. Previously, when the Moon administration announced its New Southern Policy in 2021, it indicated that it would align with the United States on Indo-Pacific strategy, including on the Taiwan Strait. In reality, however, Moon's vision remained peninsula-focused. Strategic alignment with the Indo-Pacific was constrained by Moon's own China policy when he committed to 'Three Nos': no additional deployments of the THAAD, or Terminal High Altitude Area Defense, missile defense system, no involvement in a wider US-led missile defense network, and no involvement in a 'trilateral military alliance' with the United States and Japan. Cooperation among the three nations would be limited to issues with North Korea. Despite the deterioration of the security environment, Russia's invasion of Ukraine, deeper Russia–North Korea security cooperation, and tensions across the Taiwan Strait, it is possible that there will be another sudden shift in Seoul's strategic orientation, if there is a change of leadership from conservative to progressive. Will South Korea's next president continue an approach to national security based on a global and Indo-Pacific vision of South Korea's role? Will cooperation with Japan, bilaterally and in the trilateral framework with the United States, continue to be seen as 'not an option but absolutely essential' in Seoul? As South Korea emerges out of its leadership vacuum, it will attempt to find 'balance' in its diplomacy in its own way. Seoul's choice in the post-Yoon era should be watched with great interest given its potential significance for regional and global cooperation. Clearly, the ruling conservative People Power Party faces an uphill battle to keep the presidency due to Yoon's declaration of martial law and his subsequent impeachment. The election, after all, is taking place only two months after the constitutional court ruling affirmed his removal. Focus has therefore shifted to the possibility of a return to progressive leadership. The opposition's leading candidate is Lee Jae-myung of the Democratic Party of Korea, who previously ran against Yoon in the 2022 presidential election. The extent of current Korean political division has purportedly alienated political independents, who want to see a return to stability above all else. Thus, Lee must win the support of the 'middle-of-the-road' voters to prevail in the presidential race. Diplomatically, facing various national crises, a progressive president will also have little choice but to cooperate with the United States and Japan. Recently, Lee and the DPK are promoting a more pragmatic line based on 'realism' at home and abroad. This realism includes recognition of value of the US-ROK alliance, strengthened ROK-Japan cooperation, and the US-ROK-Japan trilateral. However, there remains substantial ambiguity on progressive positions on China and the Taiwan challenge, as well as toward North Korea as the situation on the Korean peninsula rapidly changes. For example, in a recent interview with the Washington Post (February 14, 2025), Lee welcomed the idea of US–North Korea dialogue. He went as far to say that he would nominate Trump for the Nobel Peace Prize if the president was able to achieve a 'significant breakthrough' on nuclear weapons and missile issues, saying that 'it would be beneficial for everyone.' Although concerns remain, on the occasion of the sixtieth anniversary of ROK-Japan diplomatic normalization, one hopes for a shift toward the political center, the 'middle of the road,' in South Korea. It will be essential for both countries to overcome the challenging security environment together. (Originally published in Japanese on April 12, 2025. Banner photo: From left, South Korean Foreign Minister Cho Tae-yul, US Secretary of State Marco Rubio, and Japanese Foreign Minister Iwaya Takeshi at a sideline meeting at the NATO Ministers of Foreign Affairs gathering in Brussels on April 3, 2025. © AFP/Jiji.)
Korea Herald
18-04-2025
- Politics
- Korea Herald
2 outgoing justices say Constitution must be abided by as prerequisite for democracy
Constitutional Court of Korea Justices Moon Hyung-bae and Lee Mi-son said the South Korea's Constitution and any ruling by the court must be abided by, as the order of the sovereign people, because otherwise social instability will ensue, as Friday marked the end of their six-year terms as justices on the bench, two weeks after the same court removed disgraced former President Yoon Suk Yeol from office in a unanimous 8-0 ruling. In a farewell speech, Moon, who served as the acting chief justice of the Constitutional Court, said, "(the Constitutional Court's) decisions must be respected." He highlighted the Constitutional Court's role in resolving deadlock, or disputes over authority, between the executive and legislative branches through making "factual and valid decisions," followed by respect for such rulings from these branches as institutions established under the Constitution. The process of how the Constitution is interpreted, developed and implemented based on checks and balances shall be further strengthened through respect for the Constitutional Court's decisions, Moon said. Outgoing Justice Lee said in her speech that state institutions must abide by the Constitution, which is the order of the people as the sovereigns of the country and serves as a prerequisite for the existence of a free democratic nation. 'If state institutions do not abide by the Constitution and ignore it, the order that supports our society is shaken," she said in her farewell speech. Their historic decision on April 4 upheld the parliament's motion to impeach Yoon for violating law and democratic principles in leading a self-coup by declaring martial law Dec. 3. Before the landmark 8-0 decision, the Constitutional Court had constantly been under attack by Yoon's legal team and the ruling People Power Party, who claimed "political bias" and demanded Moon be recused from Yoon's impeachment trial. Moon said in his farewell speech that while academic debates and criticism can of course be permitted, any ad hominem arguments attacking the justices personally cannot be tolerated. Moving forward, Justice Kim Hyung-du will serve as the acting chief justice, taking Moon's place. Moon and Lee were both nominated by liberal former President Moon Jae-in in 2019 and served six-year terms. The two outgoing justices' posts will remain vacant for the time being, at least until South Korea's new president takes office after the June 3 election. The Constitutional Court on Wednesday suspended in a unanimous 9-0 ruling the effect of conservative acting President Han Duck-soo's nomination of two Constitutional Court justice candidates to replace Moon and Lee. The suspension will last until the court delivers a final ruling in the future over attorney Kim Jung-hwan's filing of an injunction challenging the legality of Han's nomination of two right-leaning figures -- Minister of Government Legislation Lee Wan-kyu and senior judge Ham Sang-hoon. The court found Wednesday that it cannot assume that an acting president may exercise the authority to independently nominate justices, given that he is not an elected leader. In South Korea, the nine-member bench of the Constitutional Court consists of three judges appointed by the president, three recommended by the chief justice of the Supreme Court and three selected by the National Assembly, under the principle of the tripartite separation of powers. They each serve a six-year term. Wednesday's court ruling suggested that the court will rule that the country's president is the only eligible person to appoint replacements for Moon and Lee. The current front-runner in the presidential race slated for June 3 is Rep. Lee Jae-myung, former chair of the Democratic Party of Korea. Wednesday's verdict stated that the seven-member bench could hear and decide the case, but that in cases where the direction of the case might change depending on the opinions of the remaining two justices, hearings and the decision could wait until the two justice are appointed.
Korea Herald
14-04-2025
- Politics
- Korea Herald
Why Yoon Suk Yeol supporters want him back
Though 10 days have passed since former President Yoon Suk Yeol was removed from power by the Constitutional Court of Korea's ruling to uphold his impeachment, some of his supporters have continued to take to the streets on behalf of the disgraced ex-leader. A new slogan that the supporters have recently adopted is, 'Reset Korea, Yoon Again!' in English. In pro-Yoon protests that took place in front of Yoon's apartment in Seocho-gu on Friday as well as a rally of approximately 10,000 people in Gwanghwamun on Saturday, according to an official police estimate, the protesters were heard shouting the two English slogans while claiming Yoon's impeachment was "fraudulent." In front of Seoul Central District Court, where the first hearing in Yoon's criminal trial on charges of orchestrating an insurrection by declaring martial law Dec. 3 took place on Monday, supporters were also found holding the 'Yoon Again' signs. The 'Reset Korea, Yoon Again' slogan first appeared in a letter written by former Defense Minister Kim Yong-hyun in prison, revealed by Kim's lawyers at a rally organized by the far-right Liberty Unification Party on April 7. Kim, known to be Yoon's close confidant, is currently detained at the Seoul Dongbu Detention Center for his role in Yoon's botched martial law plot. 'We had to witness the heartbreaking collapse of judicial justice in South Korea due to political manipulation and fraudulent impeachment," wrote Kim. "The outrage and disappointment (I felt) were so overwhelming that I couldn't sleep. But this is not the end, it's a new beginning. We have no more ground to retreat to. We will prevail.' Kim then concluded the letter with the English words, 'Yoon Again,' which pro-Yoon protesters since adopted. In front of Seoul Central District Court on Monday morning, 27-year-old pro-Yoon protester Lee Sung-hyun, holding a 'Yoon Again' sign, told The Korea Herald that his continued motivation to speak in favor of the disgraced former president comes from his 'disappointment in Korean society.' 'Public opinion has been shaped to be so unfair toward our one and only President Yoon Suk Yeol. Honestly, I'm so disappointed at how Korean society can be so easily swayed by public opinion and what's being shown in the media,' said Lee. 'Sure, declaring martial law is bad, but we also have to consider what made (Yoon) declare martial law in the first place," according to him. Adding that he took a day off from work to partake in a rally in front of the court on Monday, he stated that he hopes for Yoon's 'swift return to politics to resolve the current political unrest in Korea.' Other than Lee, other pro-Yoon protesters claim that Yoon is eligible to run again for president, despite Korea's single-term presidency provision in the Constitution. According to Article 67 of the Constitution, Korea's presidents cannot run for re-election after serving their term under this rule to prevent the concentration of power in one individual and to avoid the risk of dictatorship, reflecting the country's history of overcoming authoritarian rule. Since Yoon technically did not serve a full term as president due to his impeachment, his supporters have claimed on social media platforms such as X that the single-term presidency rule doesn't apply to Yoon's case. On which grounds such statements are being made, however, are not clearly identified. According to the Constitutional Court Act, a president who is removed from office following an impeachment ruling is prohibited from holding any public office position for a period of five years after the ruling is made. Based on this law, some protesters argue that Yoon can also return to the presidency after the five-year period. However, law professor Hwang Do-ssu of Konkuk University, who specializes in constitutional law, told The Korea Herald expressed doubts about such arguments, saying that it is 'an invalid argument.' 'Since he has already been elected president once, the general interpretation there is that it will be considered to be a second term to serve consecutive terms or to return after a break, regardless of whether (Yoon) completed his term or not,' Hwang stated.
Korea Herald
10-04-2025
- Politics
- Korea Herald
Justice minister reinstated
The Constitutional Court of Korea on Thursday dismissed the National Assembly's impeachment motion against Justice Minister Park Sung-jae, saying it found no evidence of him aiding former President Yoon Suk Yeol in his martial law imposition. Park's impeachment was dismissed in an 8-0 decision by the eight-member bench of the Constitutional Court. The verdict came 119 days after the impeachment motion was submitted to the court by the National Assembly. The court announced there was no evidence or objective material to back the Assembly's accusation that Park aided Yoon's martial law imposition. It also stated that a gathering that took place at the presidential safe house after martial law was lifted cannot be judged as Park being involved in discussing legal measures and follow-up strategies related to the insurrection. The National Assembly previously suspended the justice minister for not opposing Yoon's martial law declaration during a Cabinet meeting that was convened on the night of Dec. 3. He was accused of allegedly planning follow-up measures for the martial law decree with former Interior Minister Lee Sang-min at a presidential safe house the following day, including the establishment of detention facilities to hold lawmakers when martial law was declared. In the first formal hearing of his impeachment trial on March 18, Park denied allegations linking him to the declaration of martial law, claiming he had actually urged the president not to proceed with the imposition. He said the gathering at the safe house was simply a meeting with acquaintances and insisted that martial law-related measures were never discussed. The Assembly also argued that Park — who oversees the prosecution service — refused its request to submit detailed records on the prosecution's use of special activity funds, asserting that the minister's refusal constituted a violation of the Act on Testimony and Appraisal Before the National Assembly. Another charge behind Park's impeachment was his abrupt departure from a parliamentary plenary session in December 2024, during which lawmakers were deliberating a bill to appoint a special prosecutor to investigate multiple scandals involving former first lady Kim Keon Hee.
Korea Herald
08-04-2025
- Politics
- Korea Herald
Justice Moon Hyung-bae's humble life draws public admiration
Constitutional Court's acting chief justice who read historic ruling on Yoon Suk Yeol praised for pursuing 'life of an average person' Moon Hyung-bae, acting Chief Justice of the Constitutional Court of Korea, who read aloud the ruling upholding the impeachment of former President Yoon Suk Yeol on Friday, has come into the public spotlight not only for his role in the historic ruling, but also for his life story, which recently resurfaced and resonated with many people. Born into a family in a small farming village in Hadong-gun, South Gyeongsang Province, in 1965, Moon grew up in poverty. He graduated from Jinju Daea High School and earned his bachelor's degree in law from Seoul National University before passing the bar exam in 1986. 'I was the eldest son of a poor farmer. I only made it through middle school because I had relatives who handed down old uniforms and textbooks to me,' Moon recalled during his 2019 confirmation hearing before being appointed as a Constitutional Court justice. A major turning point in his life came during his first year of high school, when he received a scholarship from Kim Jang-ha, a local traditional Korean medicine practitioner and philanthropist in Jinju, South Gyeongsang Province. This scholarship allowed him to continue his education through university. Moon has often spoken of Kim's impact on his life, saying he could 'never have become a justice without him.' Kim, whose life story came to wider public attention through the 2023 MBC documentary 'A Man Who Heals the City,' is known to have devoted his earnings to the education and welfare of others. He has awarded scholarships to over 1,000 students — including Moon — and supported shelters for domestic violence survivors. In South Korea, where public officials are frequently scrutinized for their wealth, Moon stands out. At his confirmation hearing in 2019, he disclosed that his total assets were 675 million won ($458,412), with his personal assets less than 400 million — significantly below the average for his peer judges, which at the time was 2 billion won. 'When I got married, I promised myself I would never stray from the life of an average person. I've recently realized my assets slightly exceed the national average of about 300 million won per household, and I'm genuinely sorry about that,' Moon told lawmakers. Moon, also an active blogger who shares his thoughts via the platform Tistory on books he has read and cases he has covered, has posted over 1,500 posts reflecting on law, society and literature. One of them reads: 'I know how easily poverty can upend a person's life," he wrote, adding that society should move toward reducing the impact poverty has on individuals. Following the court's historic recent impeachment ruling, hundreds of comments flooded his blog, thanking him for his service and integrity. While Moon is set to step down from the Constitutional Court on April 18 after completing his six-year term, he has already made clear that he has no plans to open a private law practice, but will remain committed to public service. 'Even after becoming a justice, I have never forgotten that my duty is to repay society for the support I received,' he said in 2019. The 60-year-old justice's judicial career has been also defined by a blend of compassion and firmness. While serving as the chief judge of Changwon District Court from 2004 to 2007, he oversaw criminal appeal and corruption cases that drew attention for their principled, human-centered rulings. In one case in 2007, Moon presided over a man who attempted suicide by setting fire to a motel room due to credit card debt. Instead of a jail term, Moon sentenced him to probation and urged him to reconsider life's value. 'Say the world 'suicide' ("jasal" in Korean) 10 times. To us, what you just said sounds like 'let's live' ("salja" in Korean). Think again about why you must live,' Moon told him, giving him a book titled, '49 Things You Must Do While Alive.' In contrast, Moon has been strict when it comes to corruption cases. During the 2006 local elections, he handed down tough penalties, saying that even the smallest bribery case should lead to the annulment of the election results. Citing 'Admonitions on Governing the People' (1820) by reformist philosopher, poet and scholar-official Dasan Jeong Yak-yong, Moon emphasized that 'integrity is the root of all virtue.' When Moon presided over the historic ruling that removed Yoon Suk Yeol on Friday, he read, 'By deploying the military and police to undermine the authority of the National Assembly and other constitutional institutions and violate the fundamental human rights of the people, the defendant failed in his duty to protect the Constitution and seriously betrayed the trust of the South Korean people, the sovereigns of the Republic of Korea.'
