but, on the contrary, contributed to it.
44
Not surprisingly, when the conservative
GNP returned to power after the 2007 presidential election and 2008
parliamentary election, even the first regulation on cross-ownership of media that
had survived constitutional review in 2006 was repealed by the revision of the
Newspapers Act in 2009 so that newspaper companies were able to own broad-
casting companies.
In the meantime, the KCC considered controversial cases of freedom of assem-
bly and demonstration, such as theNighttime Outdoor Assembly Prohibitioncase.
Article 10 of the Assembly and Demonstration Act used to prohibit outdoor assem-
bly across the country between sunset and sunrise unless the head of police granted
permission to hold assembly under certain conditions. On September 24 , 2009 , the
KCC reversed its previous position,^45 declaring that such regulation was incompat-
ible with the Constitution because, on the one hand, as the five majority reasoned,
such regulation could be seen as a de facto assembly-licensing system banned by
Article 21 ( 2 ) of the Constitution and, on the other, as the two concurring justices
recognized, it was excessive restriction on the freedom of assembly beyond
necessity.
46
The right to property
Article 23 of the Constitution provides that a general right to property is guaran-
teed according to the law prescribing the content and limit of such right.
The Roh Moo-hyun administration made efforts to solve the epidemic realty
speculation problem across the nation and regarded tax reform as an effective
means to control such a socioeconomic problem. The comprehensive real-estate
tax is a key policy tool introduced for such a purpose, targeting the owners of
houses in overheated speculative zones. Not surprisingly, those hit by the new tax
filed a constitutional complaint which lasted two years. One year after the 2007
presidential election that resulted in the victory of the opposition GNP candidate
Lee Myong-bak, who pledged to repeal the comprehensive real-estate tax, the
KCC invalidated a couple of key provisions of estate tax law. For example,
the provision imposing comprehensive real-estate taxes on housing was declared
not to conform to the Constitution as it violated property rights of a certain group
of taxpayers who “have held the housing for a certain period of time or who have
yet to retain for the set period but have low or de facto no taxpaying capacity due
to lack of specific properties or income other than the housing subject to
(^44) Constitutional Court Decision 2005 Hun-Ma 165 , June 29 , 2006 ,Korean Constitutional
Court Reports, Vol. 18 ,No 1 , Part 1 , 337.
(^45) Constitutional Court Decision 91 Hun-Ba 14 , April 28 , 1994 ,Korean Constitutional Court
Reports, Vol. 6 ,No 1 , 281 , 302.
(^46) Constitutional Court Decision 2008 Hun-Ka 25 , September 24 , 2009 ,Korean Constitutional
Court Reports, Vol. 21 ,No 2 , Part 1 , 427.