The article highlights the protracted struggle faced by victims of South Korea's Emergency Measure 9, enacted during the Park Chung-hee dictatorship, to receive state compensation. After the Constitutional Court declared the measure unconstitutional in 2013, victims initiated legal action, which took nearly a decade before the Supreme Court issued a ruling in their favor in 2022. A key point of contention was a 2014 Supreme Court ruling that stated while the Emergency Measure was illegal, it did not constitute a legal obligation for the state to provide compensation, creating a paradox for victims seeking justice.

Resistance against the Supreme Court's ruling arose from various quarters, including judicial figures who challenged it. Notably, judges like Lee Ok-hyung and Kim Gi-young openly contradicted the Supreme Court's stance in their rulings in 2015, asserting that the state was liable for damages. Their actions, however, drew criticism and attempts at discipline by the court administration, particularly during the subsequent scandal involving judicial corruption under former Chief Justice Yang Sung-taek. This prompted fears about reprisals from the regime and highlighted the tension between judicial independence and political pressure.

As the article revisits these historical events, it draws attention to the risks of redefining legal responsibilities and the potential implications of new legislation proposed by the ruling party, which seeks to criminalize judicial distortions. This legislation raises concerns about the possible emergence of similar judicial pressures that victims of Emergency Measure 9 once faced, indicating the cyclical nature of power struggles within the South Korean judiciary, underscoring a need for vigilance in protecting judicial integrity and victim rights in the future.