Passing the 'Gongsi' During Criminal Trial... Supreme Court Rules "Cancellation of Pass Valid"

Court: "Fraud causing significant results that harm fairness and efficiency"

[Asia Economy Reporter Heo Kyung-jun] An applicant who was disqualified after passing a civil servant recruitment exam while undergoing a criminal trial filed a lawsuit but ultimately lost.

The Supreme Court's 3rd Division (Presiding Justice Kim Jae-hyung) announced on the 31st that it upheld the lower court's ruling, which dismissed Mr. A's lawsuit against the Chief Presidential Secretary seeking to cancel the disqualification and suspension of eligibility for the exam.

In November 2018, Mr. A applied for the Presidential Secretariat's specialized fixed-term civil servant recruitment exam and received final acceptance notification in December of the same year. Before the interview, Mr. A answered "No" to the question on the pre-appointment questionnaire asking, "Have you ever been investigated or prosecuted by the police, prosecution, Board of Audit and Inspection, etc., for criminal cases or job-related misconduct?"

During the verification process of successful candidates, it was revealed that Mr. A was undergoing a criminal trial, resulting in his acceptance being canceled and his eligibility to take civil servant exams suspended for five years. Mr. A filed an administrative lawsuit against the Chief Presidential Secretary, arguing that the pre-appointment questionnaire was neither an official exam-related explanatory document nor a certificate, and thus there was no valid reason for the disciplinary action.

The trial focused on whether Mr. A's answer of "No" to the question about investigation history on the questionnaire before the civil servant recruitment interview constituted grounds for disqualification.

The first and second trial courts ruled that the cancellation of Mr. A's acceptance was lawful. The courts stated, "Mr. A's actions fall under 'any other fraudulent means that affect the test results of oneself or others' as stipulated in the Civil Service Appointment Examination Regulations," and added, "There is a greater public interest in strictly sanctioning fraudulent acts that cause serious harm to the fairness and efficiency of the appointment exam, and restricting eligibility to take the civil service exam for a certain period is reasonable."

The Supreme Court also agreed with the lower courts' judgment.

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