To those who claim North Korea is an enemy state

One needs to reflect on Article 3 of the Constitution.
Article 3 of the Constitution stipulates that the territory of the Republic of Korea shall consist of the Korean Peninsula and its adjacent islands. This can be interpreted as defining the legal normativity of our Constitution or the spatial scope of the Republic of Korea's sovereignty, meaning that the sovereignty, Constitution, and laws of the Republic of Korea apply to the North Korean region without any legal obstacles.
However, according to this interpretation, the North Korean region would be considered an unrecovered territory that the Republic of Korea must reclaim, and the North Korean regime occupying said region could only be viewed as an anti-state organization that cannot be tolerated under the Constitution.
On the other hand, Article 4 of the Constitution stipulates that the Republic of Korea pursues unification and establishes and promotes unification policies based on the fundamental democratic order. This can be interpreted as a provision implying that a political entity exists in the North Korean region that must be integrated with the Republic of Korea.
Furthermore, according to this interpretation, while the provisions of Article 4 do not constitute formal recognition of the political entity occupying the North Korean region as a state, they are seen as provisions recognizing North Korea as a practical ruling group possessing national capacity for activity. If so, from a literal standpoint, Article 3 of the Constitution cannot recognize any political entity that conflicts with the sovereignty of the Republic of Korea regarding the North Korean region.
The Constitutions of the First Republic (the Constituent Constitution, the 1st Amendment, and the 2nd Amendment), the Second Republic (the 3rd and 4th Amendments), and the Third Republic (the 5th and 6th Amendments) contained no explicit provisions regarding unification. Explicit provisions related to unification began to appear starting from the Constitution of the Fourth Republic (the 7th Amendment).
In the Constitution of the Fourth Republic, the Preamble declared the peaceful unification of the fatherland as a historical mission; Article 35 established the National Conference for Unification as a national organizational body to promote the peaceful unification of the fatherland; and Article 43, Paragraph 3, and Article 46 explicitly stipulated that the peaceful unification of the fatherland is a duty of the President. The Constitution of the Fifth Republic (the 8th Amendment) was identical to the Fourth Republic in that its Preamble declared the peaceful unification of the fatherland as a historical mission and Articles 38, Paragraph 3, and 44 explicitly stipulated that the peaceful unification of the fatherland is a duty of the President. However, it differed in that Article 47 allowed the President to submit important policies regarding unification to a national referendum, and Article 68 allowed for the establishment of a Peaceful Unification Policy Advisory Council to advise the President on the formulation of peaceful unification policies, replacing the former National Conference for Unification.
In the case of the current Constitution of the Sixth Republic (the 9th Amendment), it is identical to the Fifth Republic in that its Preamble declares the peaceful unification of the fatherland as a historical mission, Articles 66, Paragraph 3, and 69 explicitly stipulate that the peaceful unification of the fatherland is a duty of the President, and Article 72 allows the President to submit important policies regarding unification to a national referendum. The most significant feature of the current Constitution is the newly added Article 4, which stipulates that "The Republic of Korea pursues unification and establishes and promotes peaceful unification policies based on the fundamental democratic order." I believe the significance lies in the fact that it declares a more active and forward-looking stance regarding the issue of peaceful unification than before.
Because North Korea cannot be recognized as a political entity under the territorial clause of Article 3 (as an anti-state or illegal organization), yet the peaceful unification clause of Article 4 recognizes the political entity of North Korea as an equal party to unification, I hold the view that these two provisions contradict each other in their substantive framework, necessitating a constitutional amendment.