Officer Who Told Married Junior Female Colleague "I Like You a Lot" Gets Pay Cut... Court Rules Discipline Justified

The court has ruled that the pay?cut disciplinary action imposed on an Air Force officer who expressed romantic feelings toward a junior female colleague who was married was justified.

According to the legal community on the 15th, the 11th Administrative Division of the Seoul Administrative Court, presided over by Judge Kim Junyoung, ruled against the plaintiff last December in a lawsuit filed by Air Force officer A against the Minister of National Defense seeking to overturn a pay?cut disposition.

In June 2023, A expressed romantic feelings to junior female officer B, using expressions such as "my jewel" and "I like you a lot." At that time, both A and B were married. In July of the following year, the Ministry of National Defense’s disciplinary committee concluded that A had made sexually harassing remarks to B and imposed a three?month pay cut.

A filed an appeal with the Ministry of National Defense Appeals Review Committee, but when it was dismissed, A brought an administrative lawsuit seeking to have the pay?cut disposition revoked. A argued that the right to defense had been infringed because the specific facts underlying the disciplinary charges had not been clearly identified during the disciplinary process, and claimed that the situation arose from a misunderstanding that occurred while B was rejecting A’s advances.

The court, however, did not accept A’s arguments. It found that A had been guaranteed the opportunity to exercise the right to defense, including by submitting a written opinion and appearing before the disciplinary committee. Based on recorded conversations between the two, the court further found that "it was rather A who continued to express affection, while B was placed in an uncomfortable situation."

The court stated, "The grounds for discipline in this case are that A, who was married and in a superior position, expressed romantic feelings to B, who was also married and in a subordinate position, and asked to meet," adding that "from the victim’s standpoint, the content could be disgusting and insulting."

The court also held that "the public interest to be achieved through this disposition, such as 'establishing discipline in public service by eradicating sexual harassment,' cannot be said to be minor compared with the disadvantages A will suffer," and concluded that the pay?cut disposition could not be deemed unlawful as an abuse or deviation of discretionary authority.