The court issued a decision to 'suspend the effectiveness' of the appointment of Shin Dong-ho as president of the Korean Educational Broadcasting System (EBS) by the Korea Communications Commission. Accordingly, President Shin cannot hold the office until a month after the ruling on the invalidity of the appointment lawsuit.
On the 7th, the Seoul Administrative Court's Administrative Division 2 (Director General Go Eun-seol) granted the request for a suspension of appointment filed by former EBS President Kim Yu-yeol against Chairperson Lee Jin-sook of the Korea Communications Commission.
Earlier, former President Kim Yu-yeol's three-year term expired on the 7th of last month. Accordingly, the Korea Communications Commission held a general meeting on the 26th of last month and approved the appointment of President Shin Dong-ho.
In response, former President Kim filed a request for a temporary injunction to suspend the appointment and a lawsuit for the invalidity of the appointment the next day, arguing, 'The Korea Communications Commission is a five-member body, and it is illegal to pass the agenda of appointing a representative with just two members.'
According to current law, the Korea Communications Commission consists of five members: two appointed by the president and three recommended by the National Assembly (one from the ruling party and two from the opposition). However, since three positions for commissioners recommended by the National Assembly became vacant at the end of August last year, it has been operating with just Chairperson Lee Jin-sook and Deputy Chairperson Kim Tae-kyu in a 'two-member system' up until now. The quorum for Korea Communications Commission decisions is two or more.
The court stated, 'The claims and materials from the chairperson's side are insufficient to fully substantiate that there were no procedural defects regarding this case (the appointment of Shin Dong-ho as president).'
The court cited the Korea Communications Commission Act as the reason. The court noted, 'The Korea Communications Commission Act can be viewed as assuming that decision-making in a meeting of the Korea Communications Commission is conducted based on the principle of majority vote, which functions through discussion and consultation among commissioners.' It argued that in a two-member system, it is difficult to see that such decision-making could be achieved according to this principle of majority vote.
In response, the Korea Communications Commission argued, 'If the agenda is void or canceled simply because it was deliberated and decided in a two-member system, it would hinder the Commission's handling of its work.' However, the court stated, 'The Korea Communications Commission Act only requires deliberation and decision on major matters concerning broadcasting-related regulatory policies and their implementation, so other general administrative tasks can be decided without going through the meeting body.'