Vice Principal Dismissed After Whistleblowing... Court Says "No Causal Link Proven"

Court: “Due to External Factors such as Staff Reduction”

Yonhap News Agency

A vice principal at a private alternative school in Seoul, who was dismissed after making a public interest report about school misconduct, filed a lawsuit demanding protective measures, but the court did not accept the claim.

According to the legal community on May 11, the Seoul Administrative Court’s 14th Administrative Division (Chief Judge Lee Sangdeok) recently ruled against the plaintiff in a lawsuit filed by Mr. A seeking to overturn the National Rights Commission's decision to deny protective measures.

Mr. A, who served as the vice principal of the elementary section at a private alternative school in Seoul, filed a public interest report with the Anti-Corruption and Civil Rights Commission in March 2024, alleging that the principal and the middle and high school vice principal had violated the Elementary and Secondary Education Act and the Local Subsidy Act. He claimed that the school created classrooms in the basement, which was not a designated educational facility, and that subsidies awarded for creating a library were actually used to build a church.

The following year, after the school received a notice from the Seoul Metropolitan Office of Education to reduce the number of vice principal positions from two to one, it decided to retain the vice principal position for the middle and high school section, which had more students and faculty than the elementary section. The school offered Mr. A, “Externally, you will maintain your status as a teacher, but internally, you will be treated as a vice principal,” but Mr. A refused this proposal.

Subsequently, before the start of the 2025 academic year, the school removed Mr. A from the vice principal position and then dismissed him, citing his refusal to submit documents related to employment. Mr. A then applied for protective measures to the Anti-Corruption and Civil Rights Commission, but the commission rejected the application, stating that there was insufficient causal relationship between the personnel disadvantage and the public interest report.

The court’s ruling was the same. The bench stated, “Not being appointed to the vice principal position was not a disadvantage resulting from the public interest report, but rather due to the reduction in vice principal positions,” and added, “The school tried to minimize any disadvantage by promising to treat Mr. A as the elementary vice principal.” Mr. A argued that the Labor Relations Commission had ruled his dismissal unfair, but the court did not accept this claim.

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