Three Years of the "Workplace Harassment Prohibition Act"... Increasing Court Rulings Holding Companies Accountable

Jikgang Gapjil 119 Releases Analysis Report on 18 Court Cases
"Awareness Improvement Effects Revealed"

The photo is not related to specific expressions in the article. [Image source=Pixabay]

[Asia Economy Intern Reporter Kim Nayeon] Over the three years since the enforcement of the 'Workplace Harassment Prohibition Act,' there has been a growing trend of holding not only perpetrators but also companies that condone or aid such acts legally responsible.

According to Workplace Gapjil 119 on the 31st, since the enactment of the 'Workplace Harassment Prohibition Act,' court rulings increasingly recognize the legal liability of companies that neglect reports or engage in retaliatory actions after receiving complaints.

The Workplace Harassment Prohibition Act, an amendment to the Labor Standards Act, prohibits employers or employees from using hierarchical power in the workplace to inflict physical or mental suffering on other workers. It came into effect on July 16, 2019.

Workplace Gapjil 119 emphasized in its 'Analysis Report on Workplace Harassment Cases and Precedents,' which analyzed 18 related rulings, that "recent judgments strengthening civil and criminal liabilities for neglect or retaliation after reports confirm the importance of company responsibility regarding workplace harassment."

According to the analysis, these rulings specify that under Article 76-3 of the Labor Standards Act, when an employer becomes aware of harassment, they must promptly conduct an objective investigation and, upon verification, protect the victim and discipline the perpetrator.

Compensation amounts, initially recognized around 3 million won in the early stages of the law's enforcement, have recently increased significantly to the 10 million won range, indicating a substantial rise in liability for damages.

Additionally, the first prison sentence was handed down to an employer who treated a workplace harassment reporter unfavorably. On the 12th of this month, the Supreme Court upheld a lower court ruling sentencing a business owner to six months in prison with a two-year probation and 120 hours of community service for dismissing a victim who reported harassment on the grounds of unauthorized absence.

The business owner was found to have recorded the victim's report and assisted the perpetrator in filing a defamation lawsuit against the victim. When disputes arose over unfair dismissal, the employer transferred the victim to another position, thereby imposing disadvantages.

In a survey conducted by Workplace Gapjil 119 in June, commissioned to a professional public opinion agency targeting 1,000 office workers, 24.1% of the 29 respondents who reported workplace harassment said they had experienced unfavorable treatment.

The organization stated, "This means that one in four reporters suffers from 'retaliatory gapjil' (abuse of power)," and emphasized that "strong sanctions are necessary based on these rulings."

Attorney Jeong Soyeon of Workplace Gapjil 119 said, "Social awareness of workplace harassment has increased, and criminal punishment precedents have emerged, showing a clear trend of improvement since the law was amended," adding, "It is important to remember that workplace harassment is not only an ethical wrongdoing but also an illegal act."

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