Court Dismisses Jung Yumi's Request to Suspend 'Demotion' Personnel Order: "No Irreparable Harm"

Jung Yumi Effectively Demoted from Chief Prosecutor to High Prosecutor Level
Court Acknowledges "Effective Disadvantage" to Jung
No "Urgent Necessity" Proven to Suspend Personnel Order

Chief Prosecutor Jung Yumi (30th class of the Judicial Research and Training Institute), who was recently effectively demoted from a chief prosecutor-level position to a high prosecutor-level post, had her request for a stay of execution on the personnel order denied by the court.

Chief Prosecutor Jung Yumi Appears for Hearing on Suspension of Personnel Order Execution. Yonhap News

The Seoul Administrative Court's Administrative Division 5 (Presiding Judge Lee Jeongwon) dismissed Jung's application for a stay of execution against the Minister of Justice regarding the personnel order. A stay of execution is a legal procedure that temporarily suspends an administrative action until a final judgment is made in the main lawsuit.

On December 11 of last year, Jung was transferred to the Daejeon High Prosecutors' Office as a high prosecutor in a Ministry of Justice senior personnel reshuffle. She was effectively demoted from a chief prosecutor (prosecutor-general level) to a high prosecutor (deputy chief or division chief level). The day after the personnel announcement, Jung filed both a lawsuit seeking to cancel the personnel order and an application for a stay of execution against Minister Jeong Seongho.

The court acknowledged that the personnel decision effectively disadvantaged Jung, but determined that she had not suffered "irreparable harm."

The court stated, "This action transferred the applicant from a research fellow position at the Judicial Research and Training Institute, which is a chief prosecutor-level post, to the Daejeon High Prosecutors' Office as a high prosecutor-level post, only a few months after her previous transfer. This constitutes a disposition that effectively disadvantages the applicant," adding, "Whether to cancel this disposition should be carefully considered in the main lawsuit."

However, the court continued, "It cannot be concluded that the applicant's ability to perform prosecutorial duties fairly has been realistically and specifically impaired by this action," and "When public officials are reassigned, changes in work or residence may occur, and public officials are obliged to comply with such changes. Therefore, it is difficult to consider this as damage, and even if it is seen as damage, the extent of the infringement cannot be deemed significant."

The court also explained, "Any damage to the applicant's reputation and social standing caused by this action can be substantially restored if she prevails in the main lawsuit," and "Other circumstances cited by the applicant do not constitute an urgent necessity to suspend the effect of this action."

The Ministry of Justice's recent senior personnel reshuffle has been criticized within and outside the legal community as being disciplinary in nature. Jung has previously voiced criticism on key issues such as the separation of investigative and prosecutorial powers, the abolition of the prosecution service, and the decision not to appeal the Daejang-dong case.

At the hearing on the application for a stay of execution held on December 22, Jung stated, "This is not only a violation of the law but also an extremely unusual personnel decision with no historical precedent," adding, "It is highly inappropriate to conduct personnel decisions based on an individual's expression of opinion." She further said, "Because this extraordinary personnel decision was widely reported in the media, I, who have worked diligently and faithfully in the prosecution for 25 years, have drawn significant public attention and suffered damage to my reputation." She also cited the inconvenience of being relocated for work.

The Ministry of Justice maintains that, under the Public Prosecutors' Office Act, prosecutors are classified only as the Prosecutor General and prosecutors, so this is not a demotion but a legitimate reassignment of duties.