Supreme Court: "Business Suspension of Job Advertisement Site Posting False Company Names and Addresses Is Justified"

Supreme Court, Seocho-dong, Seoul / Photo by Honam Moon munonam@

[Asia Economy Reporter Kim Daehyun] The Supreme Court has ruled that the Ministry of Employment and Labor's business suspension order against a job advertisement site operator for posting job ads with false addresses and contact information of employers is justified.

On the 15th, the Supreme Court's 2nd Division (Presiding Justice Noh Jeonghee) announced that it overturned the lower court's ruling, which had ruled in favor of operator A in a lawsuit seeking cancellation of the business suspension order issued by the Minister of Employment and Labor, and remanded the case to the Seoul High Court.

In 2017, A posted six job advertisements containing company names, addresses, names, and phone numbers. However, the Ministry of Employment and Labor's investigation found that five of these addresses did not actually exist. One other was found to list a park site address. About half of the phone numbers registered in the ads were unreachable.

Accordingly, in October 2018, the Ministry of Employment and Labor imposed an administrative sanction of 'one-month business suspension' on A, citing Article 28, Clause 1 of the Enforcement Decree of the Employment Security Act, stating that "job advertisements with false company names (or names) and addresses were posted."

Article 28, Clause 1 of the Enforcement Decree of the Employment Security Act stipulates that "job advertisements that do not display the employer's company name (or name) or that show the employer's contact information as a mailbox, etc., making the employer's identity uncertain, shall not be posted."

However, A filed a lawsuit seeking cancellation of the sanction, arguing that he was unaware that the employer's address and contact information were false and that he had no authority or obligation to investigate this.

The first and second trials ruled in favor of A, judging that the ads posted on A's site did not fall under the cases specified in the Enforcement Decree of the Employment Security Act as "job advertisements of employers whose identity is uncertain."

On the other hand, the Supreme Court ruled to re-examine and reconsider the case. The court pointed out, "The Enforcement Decree of the Employment Security Act is intended to allow job-seeking workers to know the definite identity, address, and phone number of employers, thereby protecting workers from employers who hide their identity and operate illegal or ghost companies."

It added, "It can be objectively recognized that the company names (or names) and addresses of the six job advertisements are false, which constitutes a violation of the compliance requirements for job information providers stipulated in the Enforcement Decree of the Employment Security Act," and "the lower court erred in misunderstanding the legal principles concerning the compliance requirements for job information providers under the Employment Security Act."

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