The Supreme Court has postponed the ruling on Seo Geo-seok, Superintendent of Education for Jeonbuk Province, to June 26. The court accepted a request submitted by Seo's legal team on May 7 and rescheduled the verdict, originally set for May 15, to 10:10 a.m. on June 26 at Courtroom No. 1 of the Supreme Court.

Previously, the Gwangju High Court’s Jeonju branch, which handled the second trial, upheld the lower court’s acquittal of Seo for remarks made during televised debates. However, the court found him guilty of spreading false information via social media and, in March, sentenced him to a fine of 5 million KRW for violating the Public Official Election Act. Under this law, if a fine of 1 million KRW or more is confirmed, the elected official’s victory is annulled. The Supreme Court ruling is therefore critical to determining whether Seo can remain in office.

The appellate court judged that Seo’s claim during the 2022 local election campaign—that he was "a victim of one-sided assault" in a past altercation—constituted the publication of false information. The court stated, “Although the defendant claimed to be the sole victim, testimonies from professors at the scene and subsequent actions suggest otherwise. In fact, it is more natural to conclude that the defendant initiated the altercation by striking a colleague, after which a mutual fight ensued.”

If the Supreme Court upholds this ruling, Seo will lose his position. In that case, the Jeonbuk Office of Education is expected to operate under the acting leadership of the vice superintendent until the next election in June of next year.

However, the postponement introduces a new variable. On May 7, the Democratic Party held a session of the National Assembly’s Public Administration and Security Committee and passed a bill amending the Public Official Election Act. The amendment deletes part of the clause defining false information offenses, specifically exempting statements about ambiguous or unprovable "actions" by candidates—even if they are later found to be false. This legislative logic mirrors the reasoning that led to a not-guilty ruling in the second trial of Democratic Party presidential candidate Lee Jae-myung.

If this amendment is finalized and enacted before the Supreme Court issues its ruling, the legal basis for Seo’s conviction may be removed, potentially affecting his case. Observers suggest that Seo’s legal team strategically requested the delay to align with the timeline of political and legislative developments.

Still, some in political and legal circles argue that this amendment was crafted with Lee Jae-myung’s case in mind and may not apply to Seo’s situation. While Lee’s case centers on the veracity of verbal statements, Seo’s involves the intentional dissemination of false information via social media—a different type of offense. If the court distinguishes between the two, the amended law may not apply to Seo’s case.

Moreover, since the appellate court clearly determined that Seo’s social media posts constituted a false information offense, expectations that the amendment will favorably influence the Supreme Court’s judgment may ultimately prove unrealistic.

Meanwhile, Seo is also under police investigation for alleged bribery. He has publicly denied the accusations, calling them unfounded.