[Reporter's Desk] "Sejong City and Council Must Reflect on Two Years of Meaningless Legal Dispute"

A Lawsuit Between Public Institutions in One Region
Fought With Citizens' Tax Money

In modern society, the law serves as a last resort. When parties ultimately fail to reach a compromise, the judiciary intervenes to render a legal judgment. This means that, until litigation begins, there is still time for dialogue and negotiation.

There is a growing sense of frustration and mixed emotions over the perception that the Sejong City administration and local political circles engaged in a power struggle using taxpayer money. As it has become known that a lawsuit between the administration and the city council has been ongoing for more than two years, controversy is expected. Questions are being raised as to whether it was necessary to escalate the dispute into a legal battle rather than resolving it through dialogue.

In 2023, a lawsuit was filed between Sejong City and the city council over a proposed ordinance. The administration filed a lawsuit against the council seeking to invalidate the council’s re-approval of the ordinance. The plaintiff in the case was the Mayor of Sejong, while the defendant was the Chairperson of the Sejong City Council.

The administration, a public institution operating in the same region, and the political establishment engaged in litigation over the ordinance.

The lawsuit filed in 2023 concluded in August 2025, when the Supreme Court dismissed the case, resulting in a victory for the council, which had been the defendant.

Particularly, as it was revealed that both institutions, which had outwardly emphasized communication, had been involved in litigation, some in the local community have criticized not only the waste of public funds but also what they see as hypocrisy. Many view the situation as a public embarrassment. The legal battle between public institutions in a single region has left another scar on the local residents.

Although both parties are well aware that dialogue and compromise are the foundations of democracy, it is questionable whether they can truly celebrate victory or lament defeat after engaging in a lawsuit funded by citizens’ taxes. It is also questionable whether it is appropriate to use tax money for institutional conflicts. There is no reason to rejoice in victory or regret a loss. The undeniable fact is that a dispute lasting more than two years was waged using citizens’ taxes.