Court Rules Dismissal of NEC Official Who Took Fake Sick Leave for Travel Is Justified

A former official at the National Election Commission (NEC) who was dismissed for misconduct, including taking sick leave under false pretenses to go on trips, has lost a lawsuit filed to overturn the disciplinary action.

The Seoul Administrative Court, under Presiding Judge Gong Hyun-jin of the 2nd Administrative Division, ruled against the plaintiff on July 16 in a lawsuit filed by the individual, identified as A, against the NEC to cancel the dismissal.

A, who held the rank of secretary, was dismissed for unauthorized absences, tardiness, and leaving work early, as well as using sick leave and official leave by entering false reasons.

The dismissal of A was based on a job audit conducted by the Board of Audit and Inspection (BAI).

The BAI began a job audit in 2023 following allegations of preferential hiring for high-ranking positions within the NEC, during which it uncovered A's misconduct and notified the individual of the start of an investigation.

The audit revealed that A had engaged in unauthorized absences for personal reasons, such as overseas travel, or filed for fake sick leave, and had even approved their own vacation requests to leave their workplace.

The audit also uncovered that A had received travel expenses by submitting fraudulent airfare receipts.

A filed a lawsuit in August 2025 challenging the decision, arguing that the BAI's job audit was illegal and, therefore, the disciplinary action was also unlawful.

The basis for this argument was a decision made by the Constitutional Court in February 2025 regarding a dispute over competence. At the time, the Constitutional Court stated that the NEC was not subject to job audits by the BAI.

However, the court did not accept A's argument.

The court ruled that even if there was a subsequent decision by the Constitutional Court stating that the BAI lacks the authority to conduct job audits on the NEC, the results of the audit conducted prior to that decision could still be used as a basis for establishing facts.

The court stated, "Whether the BAI had the authority to conduct job audits on the NEC and its affiliated public officials was not clear until the decision on the competence dispute in this case," adding, "It cannot be said that the already completed job audit was an administrative investigation by an entity without authority simply because it was confirmed post-facto by the decision that the BAI lacked audit authority."

The court further stated that there were no flaws in the process by which the NEC used the BAI's audit results as disciplinary material, and that A's misconduct was sufficiently proven by objective data.

The court pointed out, "The period during which A was absent without leave for three days to go on an overseas trip was a time when the lax discipline of NEC employees and allegations of hiring irregularities were receiving social attention and criticism, and when the BAI was beginning its job audit," adding, "It is doubtful whether the plaintiff had any intention to comply with the minimum service regulations as a public official."

Furthermore, considering that A's fake sick leave, which the individual approved themselves, amounted to 253 days, and that the misconduct continued for a long period, along with A's own statements regarding the misconduct, the court concluded that the dismissal was within the scope of disciplinary standards.
※ Please note: This article was translated by AI and may contain errors.