Court Rules One-Rank Demotion Excessive for Soldier Who Called Superior "Useless" and Said He Wanted to "Beat Him Up"

A court has ruled that a one-rank demotion disciplinary action imposed on a service member for making derogatory remarks about a military superior, such as wanting to "beat him up" and calling him a "useless officer," was excessive.

The Seoul Administrative Court's 12th Administrative Division ruled in favor of the plaintiff on October 15 in a lawsuit filed by plaintiff A seeking the cancellation of a disciplinary action brought against the commander of the Air Force brigade to which A belongs.

Plaintiff A was reported after allegedly making remarks in front of soldiers waiting for pre-vacation education in 2024 regarding superior B, stating that he wanted to "beat him up," that he "does nothing in the department," and calling him a "useless officer," which resulted in a one-rank demotion decision by a disciplinary committee.

Subsequently, plaintiff A filed a lawsuit challenging the disciplinary action, denying that he ever made such remarks.

Plaintiff A argued that abstract and emotional expressions alone do not constitute grounds for discipline such as insulting a superior or violating the obligation to obey, and that even if recognized, a demotion was excessively severe.

The court acknowledged that some soldiers present at the scene gave consistent and specific statements regarding plaintiff A's remarks, thereby granting them credibility, and recognized that the statements were inappropriate expressions that disregarded the hierarchical relationship within the military.

However, the court pointed out that the content of plaintiff A's remarks could not be seen as specifically disparaging superior B to the extent of destroying the military command relationship centered on obedience to orders.

The court stated, "While it can be evaluated as an imprudent, rude, and reckless expression driven by self-glorification," it is "insufficient to be viewed as an intentional act to directly disturb military discipline or belittle the superior's position within the unit."

In addition, the court noted that superior B did not hear plaintiff A's remarks, and there were no circumstances showing that military discipline or the order of obedience within the unit was actually disrupted due to the remarks, concluding that plaintiff A's remarks fell under the category of "minor wrongdoing and light negligence."

Reported by Kim Jiuk | Video by Nah Hong-hee | Graphics by Lee Jung-ju | Produced by SBS Digital News
※ Please note: This article was translated by AI and may contain errors.