Dismissed After Replacing Hard Disk Under Yang Jin-ho's Orders... Court Rules "Unfair Dismissal"

Yang Jin-ho, former chairman of Korea Future Technology
[Photo by Yonhap News]

[Asia Economy Reporter Seongpil Jo] A court ruling has found that the company's dismissal of an employee for replacing and removing the hard disk of the former chairman of Korea Future Technology, Yang Jin-ho's home computer, during allegations of the 'webhard cartel' was unfair.

According to the legal community on the 17th, the Seoul Administrative Court Administrative Division 14 (Chief Judge Sanghoon Lee) ruled against Korea Future Technology in a lawsuit seeking to cancel the rehearing decision of unfair dismissal filed against the Chairman of the Central Labor Commission. The court stated, "The plaintiff's dismissal was unfair as there was no recognized disciplinary reason, and the defendant's decision to dismiss the rehearing application was lawful."

Mr. A, in August 2018, under the direction of former Chairman Yang, replaced the hard disk of his home computer and handed it over to the company CEO Mr. B. At that time, suspicions that former Chairman Yang led illegal distribution of obscene materials through the 'webhard cartel' were publicized by a current affairs program of a broadcasting company. This hard disk was later submitted to the prosecution through Mr. B.

In December 2019, Korea Future Technology held a disciplinary committee for Mr. A and decided on dismissal, citing unauthorized theft and removal of company assets. There was also a reason that Mr. A ignored the request for the return of the hard disk through a certified letter. However, the Gyeonggi Regional Labor Commission and the Central Labor Commission consecutively judged the disciplinary action against Mr. A as 'unfair dismissal.' Korea Future Technology filed a lawsuit in objection to this ruling.

Korea Future Technology argued, "The computer at former Chairman Yang's home is also company property," and "Since Mr. A removed the hard disk without permission and did not comply with the return order, the dismissal disciplinary reason is recognized." However, the court rejected this claim, stating, "There is no objective evidence to consider the computer as company property." It further added, "The fact that Mr. A handed the hard disk to Mr. B and could not respond to the return request cannot be used as a disciplinary reason."