Incheon Superintendent of Education candidate Lee Dae-hyung displays relevant documents before filing an election petition with the National Election Commission (NEC) on June 8.

The June 3 election has been embroiled in controversy since the vote counting began, due to administrative instability and errors in the tally. The Incheon Superintendent of Education election has also been placed under scrutiny, as candidate Lee Dae-hyung’s side has filed a “lawsuit for the invalidation of the election and the candidate’s win” with the Supreme Court, challenging the National Election Commission’s dismissal of his election petition.

Candidate Lee Dae-hyung, who lost the 9th National Simultaneous Local Election for Incheon Superintendent of Education by a margin of 0.76% (11,220 votes), filed for the invalidation of the win (primary claim) and the invalidation of the election (preliminary claim) with the Supreme Court (Supreme Court 2026Su5010) after the National Election Commission rejected his petition on August 7, 2026.

According to the count, candidate Do Seong-hun secured 542,849 votes (36.35%), surpassing candidate Lee Dae-hyung, who received 531,629 votes (35.59%), by a margin of 11,220 votes (0.76%p) to be declared the winner. Candidate Lim Byeong-gu placed third with 418,910 votes (28.05%).

However, several suspicious points became apparent. Among the 1,548,798 total votes cast, the number of invalid votes reached 55,410 (3.58%), which is more than five times the margin of victory (11,220 votes). Furthermore, it was revealed that ballots ran out prematurely at dozens of polling stations on election day.

Immediately after the election on June 8, candidate Lee Dae-hyung’s side filed an election petition (2026-Jungang-Gyoseonga-1) with the National Election Commission, requesting a full recount and document verification. However, in its decision on August 7, the NEC dismissed the claims regarding Do Seong-hun personally and the independent request for a recount, and rejected all claims against the defendant (the Chairperson of the Incheon City Election Commission).

In its decision to reject the petition, the NEC dismissed the request for a recount and evidence investigation based solely on statistical averages and anecdotal estimates, such as claiming that "the 3.58% invalid vote rate is lower than the national average for superintendent elections (3.99%)" or that "only two voters were unable to vote due to interruptions."

In response, attorney Kwon Oh-yong, representing the plaintiff, emphasized the necessity of judicial verification: "Since the election management agency holds a monopoly over core raw data (original ballots, serial number stubs, computer access logs, etc.), demanding the plaintiff provide full prior proof—which is impossible without such data—renders the function of election litigation, which serves as a public interest and popular action lawsuit, virtually meaningless."

According to the complaint obtained by the <Korea-US Daily>, the core issues are: ① The premature depletion of ballots and emergency supplementary delivery at 11 polling stations; ② the 23-minute voting suspension at the 1st polling station in Songdo 5-dong, Yeonsu-gu; ③ the lack of transparency regarding the legitimacy of additional ballots and the manual assignment of serial numbers; ④ the discovery of a large number of ballots with un-torn serial number stubs and new ballots without folding marks; ⑤ arithmetically impossible figures, such as a negative number (-1) for advance voting turnout in Bupyeong 5-dong, as well as other discrepancies between the number of voters and votes counted; and ⑥ circumstances involving large-scale computer data entry errors and subsequent manual corrections for the number of voters by time period in Michuhol-gu (5,998 people) and Geomdan-gu (3,865 people).

Plaintiff’s counsel, attorney Kwon Oh-yong [Photo: Reporter Lim Yo-hee]

Attorney Kwon Oh-yong shows ballots resembling fresh stacks of currency saved on his phone. [Photo: Reporter Lim Yo-hee]

Serial number stubs that should be kept in separate boxes are lying around loosely. [Photo attached to the complaint] Candidate Lee Dae-hyung’s side stated, “We are not simply raising statistical suspicions; we have specified particular polling stations, times, quantities, and photo evidence (Exhibits 10-12). Therefore, the court’s ex officio on-site inspection and orders for the production of documents regarding the raw data monopolized by the defendant (original ballots, sealed serial number stubs, computer access logs, etc.) are essential.” They added, “The Supreme Court must verify the original ballots and raw computer data through its authority for ex officio examination and orders for document production under the Administrative Litigation Act.”

The legal structure of the judgment sought by the plaintiff in this lawsuit is divided into primary and preliminary claims.

The primary claim is a lawsuit for the invalidation of the win (Article 223, Paragraph 2 of the Public Official Election Act), which, assuming the election itself is valid, seeks a re-adjudication of valid/invalid votes and a recalculation of votes for each candidate.

The argument is that if invalid votes and votes for other candidates are subtracted from the votes counted as valid for candidate Do Seong-hun, and the plaintiff’s misclassified votes are added, the vote gap (11,220 votes) could be reversed. Consequently, the defendant’s act of declaring Do Seong-hun the winner should be invalidated, and a winner should be re-determined based on the correct number of votes.

The preliminary claim is a lawsuit for the invalidation of the election (Article 222, Paragraph 2 of the Public Official Election Act), which seeks to declare the entire election void and hold a re-election on the grounds that overall violations of strict procedures—such as the preparation, writing, emergency delivery, and distribution of ballots; the infringement of suffrage due to voting suspension; poor management of serial number stubs; and potential manipulation of computer data—affected the election results.

The Supreme Court has historically declared elections or wins invalid in election lawsuits when “there is a reasonable probability that a different result could have occurred had there been no violations of election regulations” (Supreme Court Judgment 2022Su5060, delivered Oct. 12, 2023).

This case, Supreme Court 2026Su5010, is expected to be an urgent and significant opportunity to confirm the highest court’s strict judicial standards—not only regarding the win or loss of a local superintendent candidate, but also concerning the election commission’s failures in ballot management, computer statistical entry errors, and compliance with statutory voting procedures during the local election process.

Reporter Lim Yo-hee