The South Korean Constitutional Court has recently published materials addressing concerns about the newly introduced judgment appeal law that passed through the National Assembly’s Legislation and Judiciary Committee under the leadership of the Democratic Party. Critics have raised points regarding the legality of the 'quadruple trial system' and the alleged unconstitutionality of the appeal process. In response, the Constitutional Court clarified that the assertion that the introduction of the judgment appeal violates the Constitution does not hold, as the Constitution asserts the independence of judicial powers without absolute limitations and provides for corrections via both internal court systems and external constitutional reviews.

Key points highlighted by the Constitutional Court emphasize that concerns about a potential quadruple trial arise from a misunderstanding of the nature and function of the newly introduced appeal as well as the distinct roles played by the Constitutional Court and regular courts. The court clarified that the purpose of introducing the judgment appeal is to provide a mechanism for the judicial interpretation of constitutional rights, and any cases directed to the full bench of the Constitutional Court will be limited to those of significant constitutional importance or requiring basic rights protection.

The court addressed fears of an influx of cases resulting from the introduction of the judgment appeal process, which might lead to significant delays in dispute resolution. They indicated that the system is designed to process appeals efficiently and that concerns about excessively prolonged litigation do not account for the superior norms of the Constitution and the protection of public rights. The court elaborated that appropriate structures are in place to accommodate this new system without overwhelming the judicial process, emphasizing the balance between legal efficiency and the essential safeguarding of constitutional rights.