Syngman Rhee's dictatorial rule undermined the committee's normal operation, limiting it to adjudicating only six cases, two of which declared the statutes in question unconstitutional.

The 1952 constitutional amendment established a bicameral legislature, but Rhee's regime refused to enact the election law for the House of Councillors.

[3] After Rhee's overthrow during the April Revolution, the Second Republic was established through a constitutional amendment that shifted Korea from a presidential to a parliamentary system.

The following month, Park Chung Hee seized power through a military coup, suspending the constitution and halting the court's formation.

The Yushin Constitution included a provision that explicitly overturned the 1971 Supreme Court ruling on the National Compensation Act.

[5] The June Struggle in 1987 led to the 1987 constitutional amendment, which democratized Korea and ushered in the Sixth Republic, continuing to this day.

[6] The court has delivered several landmark decisions in South Korea's contemporary history, including the decriminalization of abortion and the impeachment of Park Geun-hye.

[7] In December 2024, the Constitutional Court became a political battleground once again following the impeachment of President Yoon Suk Yeol for declaring martial law.

The opposition Democratic Party of Korea (DPK) argued that acting presidents could fill the positions, emphasizing that the presidential appointment of National Assembly-recommended nominees is largely procedural.

[8] In contrast, Yoon's People Power Party (PPP) asserted that acting presidents could appoint justices only in cases of a presidential vacancy, not a suspension of duties.

[9] On December 26, the opposition parties unilaterally approved three Constitutional Court nominees, without PPP participation in the confirmation vote.

[15] However, Article 111 Clause 3 of the constitution divides the power to nominate candidates into equal thirds among the president, the National Assembly, and the chief justice of the Supreme Court.

However, only two justices have attempted to renew their term by reappointment,[19] as doing so can potentially harm the judicial independence of the Constitutional Court.

They prepare memoranda and draft decisions, functioning similarly to judicial assistants such as conseillers référendaires[20] in the French Court of Cassation or Gerichtsschreiber[21] in the Swiss Bundesgericht.

They serve renewable ten-year terms, the same tenure system as lower ordinary court judges (판사) in South Korea.

The secretary-general is equivalent in rank to other ministers in the State Council of the executive branch, according to Article 18 Clause 1 of the Constitutional Court Act.

The deputy secretary-general (사무차장) is typically appointed from senior rapporteur judges and holds the same rank as other vice ministers.

It focuses on research in fundamental academic areas such as comparative law and original legal theories related to the constitution.

Professors at the institute are primarily recruited from PhD degree holders who have studied abroad, and their research and education programs are supervised by senior rapporteur judges seconded from the court.

The five-story main courthouse, completed in 1993, is designed in a Neoclassical style that blends Korean tradition with modern technology.

The annex, completed in April 2020, is a three-story building designed to enhance public engagement and accessibility, including barrier-free features.

It includes a law library, a permanent exhibition hall for visitors, and additional office space for the Department of Court Administration.

[29] While the Constitutional Court's organizational structure was influenced by Austria, the scope of its jurisdiction follows the German model.

This restriction on the powers of the Supreme Court stems from its historical passivity in confronting other branches of government during periods of authoritarian rule.

According to Article 65 Clause 1 of the constitution, if the president, prime minister, or other state council members violate the constitution or other laws of official duty, the National Assembly can propose an impeachment motion with the concurrence of at least one-third of the National Assembly members, or in the case of the president, of at least a majority.

Therefore, previous Constitutional Court decisions play an important role in establishing standards of review for impeachment cases.

[32] While the provision aims to prevent anti-democratic factions from destabilizing society, it also risks being abused by authoritarian leaders to dissolve political parties that challenge their authority and suppress dissent and free speech.

[citation needed] Because constitutional complaints (헌법소원심판) are intended to serve as a last resort, they can only be filed after all other existing legal remedies have been exhausted.

For example, in October 2024, three Constitutional Court justices retired, but the ruling party and the opposition in the National Assembly failed to agree on how to fill the vacancies.

[40] This deadlock persisted into December 2024, complicating the impeachment proceedings against President Yoon Suk Yeol and presenting legal and procedural challenges.