Constitutional Court: "Criminal Punishment for 'Employers' Intervening in Union Operations is Constitutional"

Constitutional Court: "Prohibition on Intervention Clause Has Legitimate Legislative Purpose... Also Maintains Balance of Legal Interests"

Chief Justice Yoo Nam-seok of the Constitutional Court (center) and other justices entered and took their seats in the Constitutional Court courtroom in Jongno-gu, Seoul, where the constitutional complaint and unconstitutionality review were held on the afternoon of the 26th.
[Image source=Yonhap News]

[Asia Economy Reporter Heo Kyung-jun] The Constitutional Court has ruled that the legal provision criminalizing employers' acts of domination and interference in the organization and operation of labor unions as 'unfair labor practices' does not violate the Constitution.

On the 30th, the Constitutional Court announced that it made a unanimous decision upholding the constitutionality in a constitutional complaint case regarding Article 81, Clause 4 of the former Labor Union and Labor Relations Adjustment Act.

The petitioner, Kang Ki-bong, president of the auto parts company Valeo Mando, was prosecuted for violating the Labor Union Act by conspiring with the labor consulting firm Changjo Consulting in 2010 to dissolve the existing union (National Metalworkers' Union Valeo Mando Branch) through workplace closure and supporting the establishment of a pro-management union. After the Supreme Court confirmed an eight-month prison sentence in 2019, he filed a constitutional complaint.

The Constitutional Court stated, "The prohibition clause on domination and interference cannot be considered to violate the principle of clarity required by the constitutional principle of legality," and "The prohibition clause on wage support is legitimate in its legislative purpose as it contributes to securing the autonomy and independence of labor unions while aiming to improve management efficiency."

It also ruled, "The penal provision aims to secure the autonomy and independence of labor unions by punishing employers' unfair labor practices, which is a very significant public interest," and "The restriction on employers' freedom caused by the penal provision is limited to a reasonable scope of fundamental rights restriction, thus balancing the legal interests."

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