In the confirmation hearing of Kim Myeong-su (58), nominee for the chief justice of the Supreme Court, held at the National Assembly on September 13, the conservative opposition party called in an incumbent judge for the first time in history and poured questions to verify his ideology. Despite that the only link between the judge and Kim was that they worked together at the same court some ten years ago, the judge was summoned at the hearing because he posted an article on the court's intranet claiming, "In some ways, we can say that a trial is politics." Some ruling party lawmakers argued that the act of summoning an incumbent judge as a witness violated the independence of the judiciary and forfeited their time to ask questions.

After the confirmation hearing ended late this night, the ruling and opposition parties decided to hold an administrators' meeting in the morning of September 14 and discuss the adoption of the hearing report.

⊆ Conservative opposition questioning the ideology of a judge

Lawmakers of the Liberty Korea Party asked Oh Hyeon-seok, a judge at the Incheon District Court, his intention in posting the article on the court's intranet as soon as he appeared at the hearing this afternoon. Lawmaker Joo Kwang-deok said, "Many people are suspicious that you posted the article to defend or support Kim (who is criticized for his political and ideological bias)," and added, "Coincidently, Oh is a member of the Research Society in International Human Rights Law (Kim once headed this group)." Oh said, "Various articles on a variety of topics are posted on the court's intranet, and I posted the article because of the thoughts I had after reading something written by a chief judge at the high court. I regret that there was a misunderstanding, as if I had some particular intention. There was no such purpose."

In his post, Oh used the term “politics” in a broad definition referring to the coordination of different opinions, but the lawmakers of the Liberty Korea Party launched an attack claiming that the post supported a certain political color.

Lawmaker Jun Hee-kyung said, "No matter which judge people stand before, they should trust that they will be entitled to a trial based on law regardless of political color, but this post was problematic because it threatened this trust. You should have considered the impact of your actions, but I think perhaps you thought of it too lightly." Lawmaker Chang Je-won said, "Many senior members of the judiciary criticized the writing claiming that a court trial could become inquisitorial or end up a kangaroo court."

Eventually, Oh said, "I think my expression was inappropriate, and I apologize for the concern I caused the people. As a judge of the Republic of Korea, I thought it was all too clear and natural that we abide by the current law and the Constitution and remain (politically) neutral, and that was why I omitted it (in my post)."

Lawmakers of the Minjoo Party of Korea thought summoning Oh, a judge, as a witness was itself improper. Lawmaker Ki Dong-min said, "I can't understand what he (Oh) has to do with verifying the nominee for the chief justice of the Supreme Court. If they want to verify Oh's ideology, then this does not meet the purpose of the confirmation hearing," and gave up his time to ask questions. Lawmaker Back Hye-ryun said, "He seems like a witness who has nothing to do with the confirmation hearing, and I'm sorry that he had to come out due to the political situation in the National Assembly."

⊆ Appeals approval system and an increase in the number of Supreme Court justices under review

This day during the confirmation hearing, Kim presented several measures to improve the current system. To prevent an overwhelming number of cases pouring into the Supreme Court, Kim said he would review reintroducing an appeals approval system, which would only allow cases from the second trial with approval to proceed to the Supreme Court. The appeals approval system was introduced in March 1981 and abolished in September 1990. Kim said, "The appeals approval system is the most ideal and one (among many measures) that I want to pursue," and added, "I will seek ways to prevent side effects."

As for the "appeals court" that former Chief Justice Yang Seung-tae had tried to promote but failed, Kim said, "I am also considering measures to introduce the system after resolving some of the system's weaknesses." The Supreme Court had been under fire for opposing a greater number of judges in the Supreme Court, with people arguing that such views were based on the bureaucratic authoritarianism of the selected few. Kim said, "The Supreme Court has disagreed to increasing the number of judges until now, but I think we need to resolve the issue, even if it is just small progress, by increasing the number of justices in the Supreme Court."

Expanding civil participation in court (jury)―currently possible in the first trial of criminal settlement cases upon request from the defendant―to civil trials was also mentioned. Kim said, "The public's participation in criminal trials has been highly evaluated for having established sovereignty of the people in the judiciary and for having strengthened the people’s understanding of the court," and added, "I will review introducing the system in civil trials as well."