[Edaily Reporter Kim Sung-kon ] It is common for people not to know the name of the Chief Justice of the Supreme Court. Among the President, the Speaker of the National Assembly, and the Chief Justice, the Chief Justice has the lowest public recognition. People may know the names of past presidents, but they often do not know who the past Chief Justices were. Chief Justice Cho Hee-dae, however, is a well-known figure. He boasts the highest public recognition among all past Chief Justices. This is due to his strained relationship with President Lee Jae-myung. Recently, news about the “impeachment of the Chief Justice” has been flooding the media.
Will the Democratic Party actually move to impeach the Chief Justice, as Party Leader Kim Min-seok has publicly declared? The odds are 50-50. If they are determined to do so, they can push forward head-on immediately. Conversely, they may choose to back down after finding an appropriate justification. The problem is the strong “Impeach Cho Hee-dae” proposal from the Cho Kuk Innovation Party. It is difficult for the Democratic Party to either accept or reject this proposal. In short, it is a catch-22 dilemma.
◇Why Have Relations Between the Democratic Party and Cho Hee-dae Deteriorated? Controversies Over a Remand with Implications of Guilt and a Request for Sanctions Against a Supreme Court Justice
For a year and a half, from May of last year until recently, the Democratic Party has repeatedly pressured Chief Justice Cho Hee-dae to resign or face impeachment. This strained relationship dates back to just before last year’s presidential election. In the wake of former President Yoon Suk-yeol’s anachronistic declaration of a state of emergency and the fallout from his impeachment, President Lee was virtually assured of victory in the 21st presidential election. However, in late April 2025—just over a month before the election—the Supreme Court’s Full Bench overturned the acquittal handed down by the appellate court and remanded President Lee’s case, in which he was charged with disseminating false information under the Public Official Election Act, for retrial with a recommendation of guilt. The Democratic Party reacted strongly. Calling the unusually swift ruling—issued during the sensitive presidential election period—a “judicial coup,” they raised the possibility of impeaching Chief Justice Cho. Since the current administration took office, tensions between the two sides have escalated further. Former party leader Jeong Cheong-rae and Seo Young-kyo, chair of the Legislation and Judiciary Committee, even pressured Chief Justice Cho to resign voluntarily.
Both sides ultimately crossed the Rubicon with the issue of the re-nomination of Supreme Court justices. Concerns grew over a prolonged judicial vacuum as the conflict between the Blue House and the Supreme Court over the selection of a successor to former Justice Noh Tae-ak—who retired last March—escalated, compounded by the approaching retirement of Justice Lee Heung-gu in September. Last August, Chief Justice Cho submitted written nominations for Presiding Judges Son Bong-gi and Kim Seong-su simultaneously without prior coordination with the Blue House. However, the situation took a turn for the worse when President Lee demanded a resubmission of Son Bong-gi’s nomination and Chief Justice Cho refused. This marked the beginning of the so-called “Supreme Court justice resubmission” crisis. Despite pressure from the Blue House and the Democratic Party, Chief Justice Cho refused to resubmit the nomination, citing the constitutional provision that “Supreme Court justices are appointed by the President with the consent of the National Assembly upon the recommendation of the Chief Justice.” During this process, Party Leader Kim Min-seok strongly criticized Cho Hee-dae, calling him “the worst Chief Justice since liberation.” During the October parliamentary audit, the Democratic Party raised allegations that Chief Justice Cho had misappropriated operational expenses and repeatedly pressed for his voluntary resignation and impeachment.
After prolonged deliberation, the Democratic Party finally drew its sword. Appearing on Democratic Party TV on the 16th, Party Leader Kim Min-seok stated, “Up until a certain point, we believed it was best not to even mention the word ‘impeachment’ and instead to provide the public with thorough and in-depth explanations and foster a deep understanding—and that is how we proceeded.” However, he added, “Since there are already widespread calls for impeachment, you can consider that we have begun discussing all possible methods and avenues.” This marks the Democratic Party’s official endorsement of the impeachment of Chief Justice Cho.
◇ Amid the “Democratic Party vs. People Power Party” clash, the Innovation Party announces a “Cho Hee-dae impeachment motion” to distinguish itself
The Democratic Party cited the following as grounds for impeachment: △allegations of election interference stemming from a reversal and remand of a case just before the presidential election; △the refusal to nominate a new Supreme Court justice and the resulting prolonged vacancy; △controversies over false entries in operational expense reports and the improper payment of incentive bonuses; and △the nullification of parliamentary oversight through refusal to take the oath of office. The People Power Party countered, arguing that this was aimed at eliminating President Lee’s legal risks, and stated, “The moment an impeachment motion against the Chief Justice is introduced, the public will be calling for ‘Lee Jae-myung’s impeachment.’”
However, it remains unclear exactly when and how the Democratic Party will proceed with the impeachment. The party’s expected stance is to first gather opinions, primarily within the parliamentary caucus, regarding Chief Justice Cho’s impeachment after the parliamentary audit, and then take action based on those discussions. However, it is reported that there is significant caution within some quarters of the Democratic Party over potential backlash from the impeachment.
Amid the back-and-forth between the ruling and opposition parties, the Innovation Party has emerged as a strong ally of the Democratic Party. On the 19th, Party Leader Shin Jang-sik stated, “Just as we repelled the December 3rd insurrection, the National Assembly must put an end to this judicial coup,” and even publicly unveiled a draft impeachment resolution targeting the Chief Justice. Cho Kuk, director of the Innovation Policy Research Institute, also argued, “The impeachment of Chief Justice Cho Hee-dae is a matter for the Democratic Party to decide,” adding, “Party Leader Kim Min-seok must make a decision quickly.” On the 20th, Chairman Shin officially proposed forming a consultative body comprising five parties across the broader ruling bloc and holding a joint general assembly of lawmakers, saying, “Let’s create a joint task force (TF) to push for the impeachment of Chief Justice Cho Hee-dae.” Chairman Shin particularly emphasized that a one-point National Assembly session must be convened before the 31st to pass the impeachment motion against Chief Justice Cho, stating, “I urge the Democratic Party to take action, not just pay lip service.”
This is effectively the Innovation Party’s proposal to the Democratic Party calling for the “impeachment of Cho Hee-dae.” The Innovation Party’s decisive stance can be seen as a lesson learned from its official call for Yoon Suk-yeol’s resignation during the 22nd general election, when it argued that “three years is too long.” Furthermore, the Democratic Party and the Innovation Party are scheduled to discuss agenda items, including the impeachment motion against Chief Justice Cho, at a meeting of their floor leaders on the 21st.
The Democratic Party appears hesitant in the face of the Innovation Party’s aggressive push and its proposal to pressure for “Cho Hee-dae’s impeachment.” It cannot ignore the possibility of a backlash amid the declining approval ratings of both the party and the administration. Above all, the biggest concern is the end of Chief Justice Cho’s term next June. Although the official term for a Chief Justice is six years, Chief Justice Cho, who took office in December 2023, will step down in June 2027 in accordance with the Court Organization Act’s provision setting the mandatory retirement age for Chief Justices at 70.
◇ Huge Backlash if the Constitutional Court Rejects the Motion… Burden Also on the Seoul Mayoral By-election and the 23rd General Election
Technically, if the Democratic Party so chooses, Chief Justice Cho’s impeachment could proceed smoothly. All that is required is for at least 100 members—one-third of the National Assembly’s total membership—to propose the impeachment motion, and for 151 members, a majority of the total membership, to vote in favor. The Democratic Party’s 161 seats alone would be sufficient. However, the Constitutional Court’s impeachment proceedings present an unknown factor. The court must render a decision—whether to uphold, dismiss, or strike down the impeachment—within 180 days; if a conclusion is reached with only two or three months remaining in Chief Justice Cho’s term, it would be of little practical benefit. Furthermore, both within and outside the legal community, there is considerable skepticism regarding whether the grounds for impeachment cited by the Democratic Party—including the ruling to overturn and remand a case, the refusal to recommend disciplinary action against a Supreme Court justice, and the controversy over operational expenses—constitute “violations of the Constitution or laws and whether such violations are sufficiently serious.”
Electoral factors must also be taken into account. There is a possibility that a Seoul mayoral by-election will be held next April. Furthermore, the 23rd general election will take place one year later. This is a source of concern for the Democratic Party. In a political landscape dominated by hardcore fan bases that rely on YouTube algorithms, the “CSC” (centrists, Seoul metropolitan area residents, and youth) group ultimately holds the deciding vote. If the Democratic Party takes the lead in impeaching Chief Justice Cho, there are concerns about a backlash from centrist voters. If not handled carefully, the party could face repercussions similar to the backlash following the impeachment of former President Roh Moo-hyun during the “Participatory Government” era. Furthermore, should the case go to the Constitutional Court, the likelihood of the impeachment motion being dismissed or rejected is higher than that of it being upheld, which adds to the burden.
Public opinion trends are also a variable. The Constitutional Court’s past rulings on the impeachment trials of former Presidents Roh Moo-hyun, Park Geun-hye, and Yoon Suk-yeol aligned with public opinion. The Court dismissed the impeachment motion against Roh Moo-hyun, and at the time, public opposition to impeachment reached as high as 70 percent. In the cases of former Presidents Park Geun-hye and Yoon Suk-yeol, the Constitutional Court upheld the impeachment motions (removing them from office) by a unanimous 8-0 vote, with public support for impeachment reaching 75–80% and 55–60%, respectively. For reference, there is almost no confirmed data on public opinion regarding the impeachment of Chief Justice Cho. According to a poll released by “Opinion Poll Flower” on the 12th, 55.4% of respondents supported impeachment, while 40.9% opposed it. Other polling organizations have not yet released related results.
An expert familiar with the situation within the broader ruling bloc, who requested anonymity, expressed concern, stating, “While hardliners within the Democratic Party argue that Chief Justice Cho Hee-dae’s violations of the Constitution and the law are serious, there is no guarantee that the Constitutional Court will uphold the impeachment.” The expert added, “Considering that the impeachment trial process must be completed within 180 days, a conclusion could come just before Chief Justice Cho’s term expires. Furthermore, if the impeachment is dismissed, the political burden and fallout that the Democratic Party and President Lee Jae-myung would have to bear would be impossible to even predict,” the expert warned.
