Suspension After Overtime Pay Fraud Report... Court Rules "Lawful If No Causal Relationship"

[Asia Economy Reporter Seongpil Cho] A court ruling has determined that the suspension of a public official who reported corruption among colleagues is a lawful measure if there is no causal relationship between the suspension and the whistleblowing.

On the 19th, according to the legal community, the Seoul Administrative Court, Administrative Division 5 (Chief Judge Sangkyu Jeong) ruled in favor of the plaintiff in a lawsuit filed by the Ministry of Gender Equality and Family (MOGEF) against the Anti-Corruption and Civil Rights Commission (ACRC) seeking cancellation of a decision on status protection measures. The court stated, "The suspension and other measures taken by MOGEF against Section Chief A, a public official under its jurisdiction, do not constitute retaliatory measures related to the whistleblowing," and added, "The ACRC’s status protection decision is unlawful and must be canceled."

In February of last year, MOGEF suspended Section Chief A. In March of the same year, A was notified of a B grade in the previous year’s performance-based pay evaluation. The reason was that A violated the public officials’ code of conduct by treating subordinates in a demeaning manner. Section Chief A opposed these measures by MOGEF and applied to the ACRC for status protection. In the application to the ACRC, A claimed that "the suspension and other disciplinary actions are retaliatory measures resulting from my whistleblowing on corruption."

Previously, in December 2019, Section Chief A reported to the Legal Audit Office and others about fraudulent claims for overtime pay by members of his department. As a result of this report, disciplinary requests and recovery of the fraudulent amounts were made against three public officials. Two former department heads received warnings, and the then department head, Section Chief A, was not disciplined.

The ACRC judged that there was a causal relationship between A’s whistleblowing and MOGEF’s disciplinary actions. It notified MOGEF of a decision ordering the cancellation of the suspension and other status protection measures. MOGEF filed a lawsuit in response. In the lawsuit, MOGEF argued, "The suspension of Section Chief A and the notification of a B grade in the performance evaluation are not retaliatory measures due to A’s whistleblowing. These are legitimate actions taken after a separate audit process confirmed violations."

The court accepted MOGEF’s argument and concluded that the ACRC’s decision was unlawful. This judgment was based on the fact that even before the whistleblowing, Section Chief A had been subject to multiple personnel grievances from subordinates over several years due to unfair work demands and workplace harassment. The court stated, "Even without the whistleblowing, the series of violations committed by Section Chief A constitute serious disciplinary grounds warranting suspension and a request for severe disciplinary action," and added, "MOGEF’s suspension of A based on violations of the public officials’ code of conduct is justified."

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