1993년∼2023년 30년간 대법원 전원합의체 재판에 관한 코트별 통계 분석

The Korean Supreme Court has been composed of the Chief Justice and 13 Justices (including the Director of the Court Administration Office) since February 1988 (however, from December 2005 to December 2007, it was composed of 12 Justices excluding the Director of the Court Administration Office), and has operated a subcommittee composed of four Justices since March 1989, and has implemented the non-continuance of trial system since September 1994. The Supreme Court's organization and appeal system as described above are still in place today. From the 12th Chief Justice Yoon Kwan, the 13th Chief Justice Choi Jong-young, the 14th Chief Justice Lee Yong-hoon, the 15th Chief Justice Yang Seung-tae, and the 16th Chief Justice Kim Myeong-su, the Chief Justices have been serving six-year terms for 30 years from September 1993 to September 2023. Generally, the Supreme Court during the term of office of each Chief Justice is called the Court named after that Chief Justice. I conducted a statistical analysis by court for all full bench trials over the 30-year term of the five Chief Justices of the Supreme Court during the period when the judiciary was normalized after democratization. The number of trials by full bench for each court over the past 30 years is 104 for Yoon Kwan Court, 65 for Choi Jong-young Court, 97 for Lee Yong-hoon Court, 116 for Yang Seung-tae Court, and 116 for Kim Myeong-su Court, for a total of 498. I conducted a formal and statistical analysis of all full bench trials in terms of the number of cases by type, the presiding justice, the types of orders and judgments, the distribution of minority opinions, and public hearings. As a result, I am able to confirm the following facts and obtain implications. First, the 116 cases each handed down by the Yang Seung-tae Court and the Kim Myeong-su Court over the past six years can be seen as about two cases per month (two months off are considered, including the month of personnel reshuffle and the month of summer vacation). Considering the number of cases and workload of the Supreme Court, this is not small, but if the agreement is carried out efficiently, it is possible to hand down 2.5 to 3 cases per month, 25 to 30 cases per year, and 150 to 180 cases over six years. Considering the necessity and positive function of public hearings, it is desirable to hold public hearings about twice a year. Second, the Chief Justice does not always join the majority opinion, and there are times when he joins the minority opinion. This can be evaluated as being based on the values ​​and tendencies of each Chief Justice. Third, there were more than 45 changes in precedents in all Courts. The changes in precedents can be evaluated as having a meaning in response to changes in the times, and it can be seen that the Supreme Court has been consistently striving to respond to changes in the times. Fourth, there were many cases where the order was to dismiss the appeal among the full bench trials that changed the precedent or declared the enforcement decree invalid. This means that the Supreme Court accepted the appellate court's judgment and changed the precedent or declared the enforcement decree invalid. It can be evaluated that the lower court led the Supreme Court's change of precedent or faithfully made the constitutional judgment on the enforcement decree, etc. It can be said to be a symbolic figure showing the importance of the lower court. Fifth, it is generally assessed that active debates and discussions took place in the Lee Yong-hoon Court and Kim Myeong-su Court, which are considered to have relatively diverse compositions of the Supreme Court, and judicial activism was judged. The Supreme Court, the highest court, freely exchanged various opinions, held serious discussions, and prepared a full bench judgment, thereby setting an example of freedom of expression and high-level discussion, and accordingly greatly improved the level of freedom of expression, tolerance, and inclusion at the level of society as a whole, and further raised the level of substantive democracy. Sixth, although the percentage of unanimous decisions in the Kim Myeong-su Court has decreased significantly to less than half compared to the previous court, this can be evaluated as being because the Supreme Court is composed of Justices with diverse values ​​and tendencies, and an atmosphere has been created in which the Justices can freely express their opinions. As basic data, a list of Supreme Court Justices who participated in full bench trials over the past 30 years, a list of all full bench trials (case numbers, case titles, and sentencing dates, disposition and types, distribution of minority opinions, and presiding justices), and a list of public hearing cases are attached as appendices so that they can be used for additional research.