단상斷想

Moon Hyung-bae, former acting Chief Justice of the Constitutional Court, gave a special lecture on the theme of 'The Path of a Lawyer' at Sogang University on September 10, 2025, and argued that judicial reform should be carried out while respecting the independence of the judiciary. He emphasized, "I agree with the necessity of judicial reform, but reform that is carried out without respecting the authority granted to the judiciary by the Constitution needs to be approached with caution." He said that he has been involved in the court for 27 years and has consistently called for judicial reform, and argued that the judiciary has never been excluded from discussions on judicial reform.

Park Young-sun, the Minister of SMEs and Startups and a former announcer, attended the lecture that day. The Park Young-sun I remember ran as the Democratic Party of Korea candidate in the April 7, 2021 Seoul mayoral by-election after the suicide of Seoul Mayor Park Won-soon, but lost to candidate Oh Se-hoon. In the following year's Seoul mayoral election, she withdrew midway through the Democratic Party's internal primary due to unfavorable public opinion both within and outside the party. The fact that the Democratic Party had only this kind of person at the time was probably not unrelated to the capabilities of then-President Moon Jae-in.

That memory goes back to when she thought she lost the mayoral seat to Oh Se-hoon, who threw a huge tax party at Sebitseom Island because of her pretentious behavior of campaigning in worn-out sneakers. She entered politics in 2004 at the recommendation of her broadcasting senior, Chung Dong-young, and lived a privileged life for 16 long years until 2020, where her son's tuition alone should have guaranteed a decent income. She was someone who thought he was not qualified to be a Korean politician because his dual-citizenship son, born in Korea in 1998, went to a foreign school from elementary school, a Japanese middle school, and an American university course. Furthermore, the fact that she sent her son to a middle school in Japan and bought a house in Japan, blaming it on her husband, was a memory of great disappointment and anger that even the Democratic Party has people like this, and that they are living a life without any awareness of the problems of the entire political scene.

It is incomprehensible why Moon Hyung-bae accompanied such a person with a dirty history to the lecture that day. Perhaps he doesn't know Park Young-sun's history well, or conversely, he may think that such privileges are commonplace. The path Moon Hyung-bae is currently taking is the same path Cho Kuk took a few years ago. He publishes books, gives lectures, and imitates politicians, but seeing him with such a controversial figure to young friends who have to go through a difficult college life makes me wonder if his 27 years as a lawyer have been fair. What I want to argue is whether the young friends at Sogang University can learn anything from Moon Hyung-bae's 'path of a lawyer' accompanied by such a person. The single path of a former judicial official in Korea, a past dictatorship riddled with privileges, cannot be a proud history.

And just a few days ago, on September 15, when the Democratic Party publicly demanded the voluntary resignation of Supreme Court Chief Justice Cho Hee-dae, citing insurrection and intervention in the presidential election, Moon Hyung-bae retorted just two days later to the President's statement that "elected power is superior," saying, "Please read the Constitution of the Republic of Korea." At first glance, Moon Hyung-bae's words seem to emphasize constitutional principles and the independence of the judiciary, but within them lies a very serious contradiction and dangerous judicial priority.

Moon Hyeong-bae's remarks, who has repeatedly imitated the behavior of a retired politician who led the impeachment of an insurrectionist, are like the actions of a clueless rookie celebrity. Why did he, who held a publication 기념회 (commemorative event), filmed a tearful video, and acted like a very decent prospective politician on TV, attack Lee Jae-myung, who attacked Cho Hee-dae? Just as he demanded Cho Hee-dae's resignation and brought up the separation of powers, if Moon Hyeong-bae has the confidence to tell the president to read the constitution, I want to ask why he is so lenient with insurrectionist parties and insurrectionists. Has there ever been anyone in the South Korean judiciary who considers Article 1 of the Constitution, which states that power comes from the people, as their creed? It is extremely contradictory and deeply regrettable to discuss classics that do not exist in reality.

The logic of Moon Hyung-bae's argument that the judiciary should participate in the judicial reform discussion sounds like nothing more than a tantrum, asking a group that disputes legal principles and judges crimes to lightly punish their own crimes on their own. Judicial reform is a demand of the times and a policy task that is being pursued as the public's demands and political decisions become solidified. It may be necessary for the judiciary to participate in its own reform discussion process. However, if it is interpreted as 'essential' or 'impossible without the judiciary,' the judiciary is showing its will to maintain the arrogance of positioning itself as the subject and judge of reform, and to see the people as pigs and dogs forever.

In judicial reform, the judiciary is naturally the subject of reform, not the leader of reform. Participation is possible, but it does not have the authority to overwhelm the will of the president and the National Assembly elected by the people. The essence of judicial reform lies in strengthening national sovereignty and deepening democratic politics. Nevertheless, Moon Hyung-bae's emphasis on the participation of the judiciary is ultimately a dangerous signal that the judiciary itself will manipulate or control the pace of reform, and can be interpreted as the will to protect its power, as it has always been.

Moon Hyung-bae argued that there has never been a time in the history of judicial reform when the judiciary has not participated in the discussion. This may be true, but 'fact' cannot lead to 'legitimacy'. Past practices do not necessarily constitute grounds for rightness. If there were cases in the past where the judiciary's participation in reform discussions led to delays or neutralization of reform, it is only right that the conclusion should be that direct intervention by the judiciary should be minimized now. I hope that the judicial officials who try to restrict the present and the future based on past practices will realize that the genes of physical violence and mental abuse enjoyed by the security maintenance personnel of the defeated Japan flow in their roots.

He said, "Read the Constitution of the Republic of Korea once." Article 1 of the Constitution stipulates, "The Republic of Korea is a democratic republic. The sovereignty of the Republic of Korea resides in the people, and all power comes from the people." This Article 1 of the Constitution is what Kim Je-dong shouted every time at the Park Geun-hye impeachment rally. To tell Lee Jae-myung to read the entire constitution, including the lines of Kim Je-dong, whom you hate, the 'bullying' that Moon Hyung-bae throws at Lee Jae-myung originates from the Japanese word 'tenkan (癲癇)', and the Chinese characters are Japanese-style neologisms, and in Korean, it is called epilepsy or seizure, or a mental illness. It is very fortunate for the people that the era has come when Kim Je-dong and Moon Hyung-bae discuss the true spirit of the Constitution, but we must keep in mind that behind their mental illness is Moon Jae-in, the brother of Kim Eo-jun, who appointed Moon Hyung-bae.

As Moon Jae-in is Yoon Seok-yeol's political mentor, I hope he knows that Moon Hyung-bae's constitution includes those who make a living from the law. Cho Hee-dae is said to be the judge who ruled that a man in his 40s impregnating a teenager was love, not rape, and released him. I ask Moon Hyung-bae, who advises the president to read the constitution to defend such a person, what kind of life have you lived? Ask yourself!