Military Prosecutor in 'Lee Yeram Sergeant Case Inadequate Investigation' Loses Disciplinary Appeal Lawsuit

On November 25 last year, a solo protest by the father of the late Air Force Master Sergeant Lee Yeram was held at Myeongdong Cathedral in Jung-gu, Seoul.
[Image source=Yonhap News]

[Asia Economy Reporter Kim Daehyun] A military prosecutor who investigated the death case of the late Air Force Sergeant Lee Yeram, a victim of sexual violence, was disciplined and filed an appeal lawsuit but lost in the first trial.

On the 1st, the Administrative Division 6 of the Seoul Administrative Court (Presiding Judge Lee Jooyoung) ruled against Mr. A in the first trial of the lawsuit to cancel the suspension order filed against the Minister of National Defense, stating that "the investigation was not conducted promptly, and appropriate measures were not taken."

In April last year, Lieutenant A, who worked as a military prosecutor at the Air Force 20th Fighter Wing, was assigned to handle the case in which Sergeant Lee of the same wing was sexually harassed by a senior non-commissioned officer in March of that year. However, the investigation was sluggish, and Sergeant Lee took her own life on May 21 of that year before the full-scale investigation began.

Subsequently, Mr. A was removed from his post due to a poor investigation. The Ministry of National Defense Military Disciplinary Committee imposed a three-month suspension on Mr. A. This was based on the judgment that he delayed related investigations considering personal leave and other factors and downplayed the incident. Additionally, Mr. A was found to have repeatedly exhibited poor work attitudes, such as resting outside the unit without separate leave application.

Mr. A filed a lawsuit claiming that he performed his duties faithfully and that the disciplinary action was excessive. He argued, "After the case was transferred, I frequently contacted the sexual grievance counselor and the public defender, and I changed the investigation schedule in consultation with Sergeant Lee," adding, "There was no unauthorized absence."

The first trial dismissed Mr. A's claim. The court stated, "The plaintiff was fully aware of several warning signs, including the victim's precarious mental state, indications of an attempted extreme choice, and the superior's coercion for a settlement, but did not conduct any investigation or take any related measures."

Furthermore, "Although the victim hoped to be investigated on May 3 during the schedule consultation, the investigation was postponed to May 21 without unavoidable reasons, and the schedule was delayed again afterward," and "the plaintiff's act of not returning after completing business trips and taking rest is fundamentally considered poor work attitude."

The court emphasized, "Especially regarding the most serious misconduct of 'dereliction of duty,' the plaintiff vaguely delayed the investigation without any measures despite knowing that the sexual violence victim was suffering mental damage and experiencing 'secondary harm' from the perpetrator," and "As a result, unfortunately, the victim died, so the degree of violation of the duty of sincerity and dereliction of duty is by no means light."

Mr. A appealed the first trial verdict.

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