▲ Seoul Administrative Court
A court has ruled that the demotion of a senior police officer, who had his two sons falsely employed at an acquaintance's company and aided in embezzlement, is lawful.
The 14th Administrative Division of the Seoul Administrative Court (Presiding Judge Lee Sang-duk) ruled against the plaintiff in a lawsuit filed by A seeking to cancel the demotion disciplinary action against the Commissioner General of the Korean National Police Agency.
A, who served as a frontline police station chief with the rank of senior superintendent, filed the lawsuit after receiving a demotion and a disciplinary surcharge of approximately 73 million won in June of last year ahead of his scheduled retirement.
The court concluded that all grounds for disciplinary action against A were established and that there were no issues with the penalty.
According to the grounds for discipline, A asked acquaintances who operated companies to hire his two sons in order to fabricate fake work experience for them.
The two sons were registered as employees at different companies without actually working there, and one of them even used the fabricated experience to land a job at another firm.
During this process, A also aided in embezzlement by handing over his sons' salary bank accounts and check cards to the company representatives, allowing them to misappropriate company funds.
The court pointed out, "The representative stated to investigative authorities that A asked them to 'put his son on the payroll for a while and handle the salary as you wish.' It appears that A had the intention to let the representative use his sons' salaries or at least was aware that the representative would use an amount equivalent to the salaries."
Investigations also revealed that A had his spouse registered as an employee at a company run by an acquaintance without actually working there.
The court also recognized approximately 24 million won in social insurance premiums, such as health insurance, paid on behalf of the family by the companies that falsely hired A's family members, as economic benefits obtained by A.
A argued that "since the sons were already financially independent, the social insurance premiums cannot be viewed as personal benefits," but the court rejected the claim.
The court ruled, "It is sufficient to evaluate this as receiving economic benefits equivalent to the social insurance premiums paid by the companies that made false hires," judging that it constituted a violation of the Improper Solicitation and Graft Act.
The court further noted, "After his sons repeatedly failed document screenings during their job search following college graduation, A requested false employment thinking that creating work experience would help them get jobs. Because A requested the false employment for his sons whose living expenses he supported, the 'creation of work experience and social insurance benefits' must be regarded as economic gains."
Accordingly, the court deemed both the demotion and the disciplinary surcharge of approximately 73 million won—amounting to three times the sum of the social insurance premiums paid—to be justified, and dismissed the lawsuit.
A has appealed the ruling by submitting an appeal to the court.
(Photo: Yonhap News)
※
Copying, redistribution, and unauthorized use in AI training are strictly prohibited.