Cho Hee-dae’s Vision for Reform: How the National Court Administration Should Evolve Beyond Virtual Assistance Note: The revised title encapsulates the essence of the content without altering its meaning or introducing extraneous commentary. It aims to c

1. Prosecution, cartel of violence and loyalty

Article 7, Paragraph 1 of the current Prosecutors’ Office Act, which regulates the organization, duties, and personnel of the Prosecutors’ Office of the Republic of Korea, states that “Prosecutors follow the direction and supervision of their superiors with respect to prosecutorial affairs.” This is a provision that stipulates by law the order in which gangsters obey the words of their boss. In reality, prosecutors in South Korea have been no different from gangsters. According to the orders of the boss or the interests of the organization, they could start an investigation or cover it up at any time. Also, someone was indicted and brought to shame through a trial. There were no limits to the abilities of prosecutors.

Source 〈Seoul Newspaper〉 (link)

Prosecutors have little opportunity to introspect or reflect on the illegal actions they have committed. This is because the surrounding prosecutors are all similar. Additionally, I am confident that working for the organization will clearly benefit me in the future. Because it has been like that until now. Based on this background, the behavioral patterns of violence and authoritarianism, strong loyalty to the organization, and a culture of retaliation against traitors, which prosecutors in the Republic of Korea have shown so far while holding the power of investigation and prosecution in both hands, are no different from gangsters. It was not a unity of prosecutors, but a unity of prosecution and violence. Now, the harmful effects of the old-fashioned prosecution will disappear into history.

Source 〈News 1〉 (link)

2. The National Court Administration became the focal point of judges and the axis of evil.

On the other hand, what about judges? Judges have weak internal centripetal power due to their obsession with judicial independence and personal neutrality. Judges do not have a strong group consciousness like prosecutors, and individual judges operate in a loose manner. For this reason, it has a more individualistic character than a prosecutor. In addition, judges have the characteristic of having to live with the burden of decision-making and a sense of isolation as they have to shoulder the responsibility and burden of all decisions as a person who passively ‘listens’ to the arguments of both sides in court and is the final judge.

When individual judges were isolated in the name of judicial independence, a strong central administrative organization was needed to coordinate the entire judiciary and represent it externally, and that is the National Court Administration. The National Court Administration was an organization that was in charge of the overall administrative affairs of the court, including court personnel, budget, and accounting, but as time passed, a small number of elite judges within the judiciary monopolized administrative power, evolving into a form of ‘imperial power.’ The way the prosecution privatized its power was transplanted to the court in a different form. The duplicated form is the National Court Administration.

There are about 3,000 judges nationwide, and about 40 of them go to the National Court Administration. Among judges, the ‘elite of elite’ judges will work at the National Court Administration. The National Court Administration oversees the entire judicial administration process in Korea. Everything from researching and establishing judicial policies, making actual policy decisions, and implementing them to the front-line courts is all done here. In effect, they have a monopoly on judicial administration.

In addition, the National Court Administration has an escalator-style personnel appointment system from deliberation officers to office/director, deputy director, and director, and has a structure in which a small number of people monopolize judicial administration authority. Therefore, even if a problem or failure occurs in the administration of justice, it is difficult to hold anyone accountable for the results. Was he envious of the organizational culture of prosecutors? Judges have also created a strong and solid focal point through an organization called the Court Administration, and have supervised judges and standardized all trials through a system called the Personnel Management Office or Planning and Coordination Office.

The Chief Justice of the Supreme Court directs and supervises the Court Administration. This is Cho Hee-dae. To put it a little radically, it can be said that the judiciary of the Republic of Korea is currently captured in the hands of one person, Chief Justice Cho Hee-dae. Therefore, judicial reform must begin with dismantling the National Court Administration.

3. Lee Jae-myeong’s remand case, Supreme Court’s declaration of political intervention

Let’s look back at the case of presidential candidate Lee Jae-myung’s quashing and repatriation. The case, which had been acquitted in the second trial, was remanded for conviction while the trial proceeded at an unprecedented and unprecedented speed. The Supreme Court reviewed 70,000 pages of appellate records in just 9 days and issued a decision in just 35 days. It is physically impossible to copy and distribute all 70,000 pages of appellate court records to Supreme Court Justices in such a short period of time, but it is in itself illegal to view them as electronic records.

Source 〈Dong-A Ilbo〉 (link)

Two Supreme Court justices were away on an overseas business trip for as many as 13 days, making it impossible to review case records day and night. When on earth did you ever see 70,000 pages of case records?

Source 〈MBC〉 (link)

All of these circumstances, which are difficult to understand with common sense, strongly suggest that the Supreme Court had decided to remand candidate Lee Jae-myung as guilty and ultimately eliminate the Democratic Party’s strongest presidential candidate.

The fact that the case, which had resulted in a not guilty verdict in the second trial with less than 40 days left before the presidential election, was referred to the Supreme Court en banc cannot be seen as a consideration of political timing by the Supreme Court. At that time, Acting President Han Deok-soo was preparing to run for president. Coincidentally, the fact that the Supreme Court was operating in conjunction with the ruling party’s presidential primary schedule was a direct challenge to the sovereign’s right to choose. So, why did candidate Lee Jae-myung need to be removed? Wasn’t it because the Supreme Court was an accomplice to martial law and civil war?

4. The reality of the judicial coup

Cho Hee-dae, the Supreme Court, convened an emergency executive meeting on the night of the civil war on December 3rd. According to a report in the Chosun Ilbo, “Under martial law, the command and supervision of judicial power will be transferred to the martial law commander,” and “future responses will be prepared in accordance with the instructions of the martial law commander and the emergency martial law manual.” It was clearly in charge of the main mission of the civil war.

Source 〈Chosun Ilbo〉 (link)

There are too many circumstances that cannot erase the suspicion that the judiciary was not only actively participating in and cooperating with the civil war, but was also engaged in its main duties. ▲Judge Ji Gwi-yeon calculated the detention period in ‘hours’ rather than ‘days’, opening the door to the release of just one person, Seok-yeol Yoon. Of course, that door was closed after the release of Yoon Seok-yeol.

Source 〈Maeil Ilbo〉 (link)

▲ Cho Hee-dae remained silent even when the Western District Court was terrorized by far-right forces on January 19, 2025. He showed extreme calm(?) even in the face of an unprecedented incident called a courthouse attack. Justice Chun Dae-yeop also made an outrageous remark that instilled courage in response to terrorist acts by saying, “We must look back to see if we did anything wrong.”

Source: Hankyoreh (link)

▲Chief Judge Park Jeong-ho, in charge of warrants, dismissed the arrest warrant for former Justice Minister Park Seong-jae and said, “There is room for dispute about the circumstances in which the suspect came to recognize the illegality, the specific details of the recognized illegality, and the degree of illegality of the measures taken objectively by the suspect.”

Source 〈Dong-A Ilbo〉 (link)

The reason for dismissing Park Seong-jae’s warrant is very significant. Accepting Park Seong-jae’s claim that he ‘just followed orders’ and was not aware of the illegality of the case means that he opened a loophole for the judges involved in the hidden rebellion who simply followed orders.

5. Reasons why Cho Hee-dae should be impeached and the National Court Administration should be disbanded

In the Republic of Korea, which adopts a three-trial system, insurrectionists will ultimately receive a final judgment through the Cho Hee-dae Supreme Court, regardless of the results of the first and second trials. There is a possibility that the Supreme Court, which has the authority to review laws, will become a high-level judicial shield for insurrectionists. The final judgment of the insurrectionists cannot be left to those who actively participated in the insurrection. They must be impeached immediately.

The judicial coup is not over. While the prosecution has acted like a gangster by monopolizing investigation and prosecution, the courts have created their own kingdom by monopolizing judicial administration through the National Court Administration. It is in line with the self-preservation of the power of prosecutors and judges.

The National Court Administration must be disbanded immediately and the authority of judicial administration must be converted to a new system controlled by the judges’ council and the public. Abolishing the National Court Administration should be the start of judicial reform. Unfortunately, the main contents of the judicial reform plan proposed by the Democratic Party include increasing the number of Supreme Court justices, introducing a court member system, and establishing a judicial personnel committee, but the issue of the National Court Administration is omitted. A Judicial Administration Committee and a citizen participation monitoring organization for democratic judicial administration must be established to institutionalize democratic control, not independence, of judicial administration. Cho Hee-dae, a participant in the civil war, cannot wait and leave it to the Supreme Court to settle the civil war.

Edit: Hyeonhwa Lee

Mapak Design: Gkumul

Article: Aide J

Reports and serial inquiries

[email protected]

How might the proposed shift from reactive virtual assistance to proactive content creation impact public trust in the South Korean judiciary?

Cho Hee-dae’s Vision for Reform: How the National Court Administration Should Evolve Beyond virtual Assistance

The Current Landscape of the national Court Administration (NCA)

The National Court Administration (NCA) in South Korea has increasingly relied on virtual assistance and automation for routine tasks.While these technologies have improved efficiency in areas like case management and document processing, a critical shift is needed to unlock the NCA’s full potential. Cho Hee-dae’s reform vision centers on moving beyond these primarily reactive roles and fostering a proactive, content-creating NCA capable of shaping public understanding of the judiciary and contributing to legal scholarship. This involves a strategic reallocation of resources and a fundamental change in skillset development for NCA personnel. Key areas currently supported by virtual assistants include:

* Case Data Retrieval: Providing basic case details to the public.

* Document Formatting & Filing: Automating administrative tasks related to court documents.

* Scheduling & Notifications: Managing court calendars and sending reminders.

* Basic Legal Research: Assisting judges and staff with preliminary research.

The Core of Cho Hee-dae’s Reform: from Reactive to Proactive

Cho Hee-dae’s plan isn’t about eliminating virtual assistance; it’s about repurposing the talent currently focused on these tasks. The core principle is to transform NCA staff into active contributors to legal discourse and public education. This means investing in training programs focused on:

* Legal Content Writing: Developing clear,concise,and accessible explanations of complex legal concepts.

* Data Analysis & Visualization: Transforming court data into insightful reports and infographics.

* Digital Media Production: creating engaging video and audio content for public outreach.

* Legal Journalism & Communication: Crafting compelling narratives about landmark cases and judicial decisions.

* Advanced Legal Research: Moving beyond basic searches to conduct in-depth legal analysis.

This shift requires a move away from simply responding to information requests and towards generating valuable legal content.

Specific Initiatives Proposed for Implementation

Several concrete initiatives are central to Cho Hee-dae’s vision. These include:

1. Establishment of a Legal Content Creation Unit: A dedicated team within the NCA responsible for producing high-quality legal content for various platforms. This unit will focus on translating complex legal jargon into plain language for the public.
2. Development of an Online Legal Education platform: A extensive online resource offering courses, articles, and videos on various legal topics. This platform will cater to both legal professionals and the general public.
3. Expansion of the NCA’s Social Media Presence: Utilizing social media channels to disseminate legal information, engage with the public, and promote transparency within the judiciary.
4. Creation of a “Judicial Insights” Blog: A platform for judges and NCA staff to share their perspectives on current legal issues and trends.
5. Investment in Data Analytics Capabilities: Utilizing court data to identify trends,assess the effectiveness of legal policies,and inform judicial decision-making. This includes predictive analytics for case load management.

Benefits of a Content-focused NCA

The benefits of implementing Cho Hee-dae’s vision are multifaceted:

* Increased Public Trust: Greater transparency and accessibility of legal information will foster public trust in the judiciary.

* Enhanced Legal Literacy: Empowering citizens with a better understanding of their legal rights and obligations.

* Improved Judicial Efficiency: Proactive communication and education can reduce the burden on the courts by addressing common legal questions and misconceptions.

* Strengthened Legal Scholarship: The NCA can become a valuable contributor to legal research and debate.

* Modernized Court Administration: Positioning the NCA as a forward-thinking and innovative institution.

Addressing Potential Challenges: Skill Gaps and Resource Allocation

Implementing this reform won’t be without its challenges. A significant hurdle is the existing skill gap within the NCA. Many staff members currently focused on virtual assistance roles may lack the necessary training in content creation,data analysis,or digital media production.

* Targeted Training Programs: Investing in comprehensive training programs tailored to the specific needs of NCA staff is crucial. These programs should be ongoing and adaptable to evolving technologies and legal trends.

* Strategic recruitment: Recruiting individuals with expertise in legal communication, journalism, and digital media can supplement the skills of existing staff.

* Budgetary Considerations: Allocating sufficient funding for training, technology, and personnel is essential for accomplished implementation.

* Change Management: Effectively communicating the benefits