군내 불온서적 금지에 대한 헌법재판소 결정과 불온서적 금지 헌법소원심판청구로 인한 징계 취소 대법원 판결에 대한 검토

The Constitutional Court decided in 2010 that prohibition of seditious books in the military would be constitutional without infringing any fundamental rights of soldiers. The military judicial officers as applicants received disciplinary measures such as dismissal and honesty in military since they had appealed the Constitutional Court. They made a lawsuit against disciplinary action, dismissing that the reason for disciplinary action was not legitimate. In 2018, the Supreme Court reversed the sentence that the disciplinary action was legitimate. The Supreme Court ruled that the book ban in the army would infringe the fundamental rights of the applicants and that soldier’s basic rights including the right to demand a constitutional appeal should also be protected. Both the decision of the Constitutional Court in 2010 and the Supreme Court's decision in 2018 have had a number of controversial issues between court opinions and dissenting opinions. In particular, issues such as how the specificity of the military should be considered, whether the basic rights of the soldiers could be further restricted, and how to apply the screening standards to the issue of guaranteeing basic rights of soldiers. In contrast to a lower judgement, the Supreme Court's decision in 2018 is meaningful because it judged whether the fundamental rights of soldiers were violated in military. In the Supreme Court's decision in 2018, it was seen that the prohibition of seditious book in the military infringed the spiritual fundamental rights of the soldiers. Furthermore, in this judgment, it was declared that basic rights were also guaranteed for the soldiers, and the military right of claiming the constitutional appeal of the soldiers was explicitly guaranteed. The Supreme Court’s ruling in 2018 shows that the basic rights of the soldiers are getting more advanced compared to the past.