Seoul City Official Verbally Abuses Superior During Sexual Harassment Probe... Court Rules Reprimand Justified

"Cannot Be Considered an Abuse of Discretion"

An employee of the Seoul Metropolitan Government who was under internal investigation for allegations including sexual harassment filed a lawsuit challenging disciplinary action after verbally abusing a superior, but the court ruled that the disciplinary action was justified.

The 12th Administrative Division of the Seoul Administrative Court, presided over by Judge Kang Jaewon, recently ruled against the plaintiff in a lawsuit filed by Mr. A against the Mayor of Seoul seeking to overturn a reprimand.

In 2019, while working as a senior administrative officer at the Seoul Metropolitan Government, Mr. A was dismissed following a decision for severe disciplinary action on charges including sexual harassment, workplace bullying, and insulting a superior. However, the court recognized only the insult to the superior, deemed dismissal excessive, and overturned the decision. This was upheld on appeal. Subsequently, the Seoul Metropolitan Government imposed a two-month salary reduction based solely on the insult to the superior, which was later reduced to a reprimand by the Personnel Appeals Committee.

Mr. A filed a lawsuit citing a lack of fairness in the disciplinary process and the absence of further investigation, but the court did not accept these arguments. The court stated, "The insult to the superior was already recognized as grounds for disciplinary action in a previous ruling, and that decision is final," adding, "It is difficult to see that there was an obligation to conduct an additional investigation."

The court also found that Mr. A's remarks, such as "It's over since it went to the prosecution" and "You should be prosecuted as a sex offender," seriously damaged the dignity and reputation of the superior and constituted a violation of the duty to maintain the dignity of public officials. The court added, "Receiving the lightest disciplinary action, a reprimand, among public official disciplinary measures, cannot be seen as a grossly unreasonable abuse of discretion by social standards." Accordingly, the court dismissed the plaintiff's claim and ordered the plaintiff to bear the litigation costs.