"Executive Who Harassed by Saying 'Alcohol Tastes Better When Poured by a Woman'... Calls It 'Ajae Gag' After Dismissal"

Lost both 1st and 2nd trial in wrongful dismissal lawsuit
"A typical case of workplace sexual harassment"

A public institution executive who repeatedly made sexually harassing remarks to young female employees lost in both the first and second trials of an unfair dismissal lawsuit.

On the 27th, the Civil Division 2 of the Gwangju High Court (Presiding Judge Kim Sung-joo) announced that it upheld the ruling of the lower court, ruling against Mr. A, an executive of a private non-profit organization in the economic sector, in the appeal trial of the 'confirmation of invalid dismissal' lawsuit filed against Foundation B.

Previously, Mr. A held a managerial position at a foundation entrusted with a public role in the economic sector. However, from December 2022 to August of last year, he is accused of repeatedly making excessive sexually harassing remarks and inappropriate physical contact toward young female employees at the office and company gatherings, such as saying, "The alcohol poured by a woman tastes the best," or to an employee who had broken up, "Does this mean I have a chance now?"

Eventually, the foundation's disciplinary committee took issue with his remarks and dismissed him for "violation of the duty to maintain dignity." In response, Mr. A filed an unfair dismissal lawsuit, claiming it was "a joke that provoked laughter." However, the court ruled that the disciplinary action was justified in both the first and second trials.

The first trial court stated, "Considering the plaintiff's position, a considerable level of ethical awareness and responsibility was required, yet he repeatedly sexually harassed young employees," and explained, "Given the relationship between the plaintiff and the victims, the age difference, and the working conditions, it can be easily inferred that the victims found it difficult to express discomfort or directly reject the behavior."

The appellate court also pointed out, "Almost all of the plaintiff's remarks contained sexual context, and the content was consistently low-grade, persistently and repeatedly targeting multiple young female employees," adding, "Most of the victims were in positions where Mr. A evaluated their work performance and decided on contract renewals. Objectively, he repeatedly engaged in behavior typical of workplace sexual harassment."

It continued, "None of the victims thought Mr. A's remarks were funny," and stated, "Despite receiving multiple sexual harassment prevention trainings, if it is true that the plaintiff held such perceptions, there is no guarantee that the same issues would not recur if the foundation maintained the employment relationship with him." The court further added, "Considering the difficulty of separating him from the victims and that most victims are currently employed, the lower court's judgment is justified."