Dismissal of Seoul National University Professor for Plagiarizing Student's Thesis Deemed Justified... Court: "Higher Ethical Standards Required"

Court: "Over Half of English Abstract Duplicated"
"Misconduct Beyond Statute of Limitations Can Be Considered in Disciplinary Measures"

Yonhap News Agency

A professor at Seoul National University who was dismissed for plagiarizing a student's thesis filed a lawsuit claiming the disciplinary action was unjust, but the court did not accept the claim.

According to the legal community on the 18th, the 11th Administrative Division of the Seoul Administrative Court (Presiding Judge Kim Junyoung) dismissed the lawsuit filed by Professor A, a former faculty member of the Department of Korean Language and Literature at Seoul National University, seeking to overturn a decision by the Teacher Appeals Commission, in a ruling issued this past March.

Professor A, who had served as a full professor at Seoul National University since 2012, became embroiled in allegations of plagiarizing sentences and the English abstract from the thesis of graduate student B, whom he was supervising. An investigation by the university’s Research Integrity Committee found that, among 12 papers authored by Professor A, four constituted research misconduct, and seven constituted research impropriety, with the severity of the violations assessed as moderate to serious.

As a result, Seoul National University dismissed Professor A in October 2024. Professor A argued that "the Research Integrity Committee made a broad determination of moderate to serious violations without specific judgments on each paper, and that taking into account papers for which the statute of limitations for disciplinary action had already expired constituted an abuse of discretion," and filed a lawsuit.

However, the court did not accept these arguments. Regarding Professor A’s claim of procedural flaws, the court stated, "It cannot be interpreted that the Research Integrity Committee is obligated to assess the degree of violation individually for each paper under investigation," adding, "Since specific grounds were provided for the disciplinary papers and these were judged to constitute research misconduct, it cannot be said that any duty was neglected."

On the extent of the plagiarism, the court noted, "The sentences in the papers are highly similar to those in the compared theses, with no citation marks, and in particular, more than half of the English abstract is duplicated." The court added, "This constitutes serious research misconduct, either intentional or reflecting a significant breach of the duty of care expected of a researcher."

The court also found the level of disciplinary action to be appropriate. "University professors are required to uphold a higher standard of ethics and morality than ordinary professionals," the court explained. "Given the continuity and recurrence of the misconduct, intentionality is recognized, and in accordance with disciplinary guidelines, the range of 'dismissal to removal' is applicable." The court further stated, "According to Supreme Court precedents, even acts for which the statute of limitations for disciplinary action has expired can be taken into account as reference materials when determining the severity of disciplinary measures."

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