Nowadays the Constitutional Court has become ‘the Stormcenter’ in political controversies in Korea. But it does not have established the levels of scrutiny yet. Sometimes it applied strict scrutiny to decide the constitutionality of the laws that restricted one's economic liberties. On the contrary it allowed a wide scope of discretions of the Legislations that were concerned with freedom of conscience.
There may be disputes about whether the Constitutional Court should adopt the levels of scrutiny or a ‘sliding scale’ approach. I think it is necessary to adopt the levels of scrutiny mainly because to reconcile ‘Verfassungsgerichtsbarkeit’ with representative democracy. As J. Ely said, in a representative democracy value determinations are to be made by the Representatives who are elected by the people in principle. The Constitutional Court may intervene when it is necessary to correct failings of the majoritarian political process and to protect freedom of minority by applying strict scrutiny.
Freedoms in spiritual sphere, especially freedom of expression are concerned with political process. And freedom of conscience and freedom of religion are for the protection of freedoms of minority groups. The Constitutional Court should apply strict scrutiny when the constitutionalities of laws that are concerned with freedoms in spiritual sphere are challenged.