'Corruption Exposure' Professor Appointment Rejected... Supreme Court: "No Principle-Based Criteria, No Legitimacy"

[Asia Economy Reporter Baek Kyunghwan] The Supreme Court has ruled that the refusal to reappoint professors who exposed historical corruption at Suwon University was against the purpose of the Private School Act and lacked objective legitimacy. The professors are now entitled to compensation for financial damages.

On the 10th, the Supreme Court's 2nd Division (Presiding Justice Noh Jeonghee) overturned and remanded the lower court's ruling that dismissed the plaintiffs' claims for financial damages in the lawsuit filed by Professors Son Byeongdon and Jang Gyeonguk against the school foundation Gounhakwon and former Suwon University President Lee Insu, seeking nullification of the reappointment refusal and claims for financial damages and consolation money. The rest of the claims were dismissed.

Professors Son and Jang were dismissed in December 2013 after being refused reappointment by the university for exposing suspicions of historical corruption at Suwon University. The university argued that the activities of the faculty council, led by Professor Son, which revealed allegations of corruption by former President Lee, were unfounded.

Professor Son won a decision at the Teacher Appeal Review Committee (Appeal Review Committee) seeking cancellation of the reappointment refusal. The court also ruled in 2016 that the refusal to reappoint Professor Son was illegal.

The first trial court stated, "The reappointment evaluation regulations at Suwon University cannot be considered objectively prepared in advance, and the evaluation of service areas lacked rationality," adding, "The criteria for selecting only a small number of individuals for reappointment refusal were not objectively established," and ruled the reappointment refusal invalid.

The second trial court upheld the first trial's judgment. However, it did not recognize liability for damages, stating there was no evidence that the university refused reappointment solely because of the faculty council activities. The professors also filed a lawsuit claiming unpaid wages and 50 million KRW in consolation money after the university did not initiate the reappointment review process.

On this day, the Supreme Court stated regarding the reappointment refusal, "The school did not establish any content or principles in advance regarding the criteria for selecting reappointment candidates," and "This is contrary to the legislative intent of the Private School Act, which requires that the reappointment of faculty be reviewed based on objective reasons stipulated in the school regulations, making it difficult to recognize its legitimacy."

In particular, the Supreme Court overturned the lower court's ruling that did not recognize liability for damages. It remanded the case to reconsider whether the defendant institution can be held financially liable for the reappointment refusal, which lost objective legitimacy.

Previously, the Supreme Court had also finalized the reinstatement of Professors Son and Jang in a lawsuit filed by Gounhakwon against the Appeal Review Committee seeking cancellation of the reappointment refusal decision.

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