Lost Lawsuit Over Exclusion From National Merit Status Due to Past Crime

Court: "Insufficient Evidence of Restored Dignity as a National Merit Recipient"

A former local council member in his 70s who previously served a prison sentence for bribery filed an administrative lawsuit contesting the cancellation of his National Merit status, but lost the case.

On March 3, the Administrative Division 1 of the Cheongju District Court, presided over by Chief Judge Kim Seong-ryul, dismissed the plaintiff's claim in a lawsuit filed by Mr. A against the Southern Chungbuk Patriots and Veterans Affairs Office to reverse the decision to exclude him from the application of the Act on the Honorable Treatment and Support of Persons, etc. of Distinguished Services to the State.

Medal of Honor for National Merit. Yonhap News

Mr. A enlisted in the Navy in March 1965 and served in the Vietnam War for about two years. After his discharge, the Ministry of Patriots and Veterans Affairs registered him as a National Merit recipient (veteran wounded in action) in 2013, recognizing his angina as a side effect of exposure to defoliants. However, the ministry later discovered Mr. A’s criminal history and canceled his registration as a National Merit recipient in 2024.

In 1998, while serving as a local council member in the Gyeonggi Province area, Mr. A received a bribe of 32 million won from a housing cooperative in exchange for amending an ordinance, and served two years and six months in prison.

The Act on the Honorable Treatment and Support of Persons, etc. of Distinguished Services to the State excludes from eligibility those who have been sentenced to imprisonment for certain crimes. However, if at least three years have passed since the completion of the sentence and the administrative agency acknowledges “remarkable remorse,” an exception may be made.

During the lawsuit, Mr. A requested the cancellation of the decision, arguing that he had reflected on his wrongdoing and engaged in volunteer activities after his release. However, the court determined that the administrative agency’s decision was justified. The court stated, “The authority to determine the degree of remorse rests with the administrative agency and should be respected.”

The court further stated, “It is difficult to recognize the volunteer activities based solely on the evidence submitted by the plaintiff,” and “Given the nature of the crime and subsequent actions, it is insufficient to conclude that the plaintiff has fully restored the dignity expected of a National Merit recipient.”

This content was produced with the assistance of AI translation services.