Court upholds reprimand of elementary school principal who ordered first-year teachers to stay late

A court has ruled that a reprimand issued to an elementary school principal accused of gapjil — abuse of power by a superior — was justified. The principal had ordered first-year teachers to work late and lock up the school building before leaving. The court found that the principal had used his position to pressure newly transferred teachers into unpaid overtime and had allowed, or even worsened, a so-called "seniority culture" at the school.

The Seoul Administrative Court's Second Administrative Division, presided over by Judge Gong Hyeon-jin, ruled against the principal on May 14 in a lawsuit the principal had filed against the education minister seeking to have the reprimand overturned.

A reprimand is the lightest form of disciplinary action, amounting to a formal caution. However, it is recorded in personnel files and can restrict eligibility for promotion or pay raises.

The case came to public attention in June 2024, when a teacher at a national elementary school in Daegu posted an account of what the teacher described as an unreasonable workplace culture on an online community forum.

In the post, the teacher wrote: "I am experiencing an irrational school culture of surveillance, suppression and unjust orders," adding that "the hardest part was being told that first-year teachers could only leave after every other teacher had already gone home."

Media coverage followed, prompting an audit. In July 2024, a disciplinary committee issued the principal a reprimand.

According to the committee's investigation, the principal told teachers, including the head of academic affairs, that "all first-year teachers must stay late" and instructed them to "stay until 9:30 p.m. for now, lock up and then leave." The principal also assigned first-year teachers to a rotating duty roster — covering cleaning, event preparation and mail distribution — under the guise of seniority tradition.

The principal filed a lawsuit in May last year, contesting the disciplinary action.

During the trial, the principal's side argued that investigators had coerced and pressured those they interviewed, and denied that the principal had made the statements in question. The defense also argued that even if such statements were made, they were merely a perfunctory response to complaints that had been distorted.

The court rejected the principal's arguments.

The first-instance court dismissed the claims, saying the disciplinary committee appeared to have reviewed all statements and objective evidence gathered during the audit — including materials favorable to the principal — before issuing the reprimand.

The court also noted that those present when the principal made the disputed remarks had testified that the principal said "discipline needs to be established," that "all first-year teachers must stay late," and that "for now, all first-year teachers should stay, lock up at 9:30 p.m. and then finish." The court found these accounts "highly specific and natural, and therefore credible."

The court said the essence of the disciplinary grounds was that the principal had used his professional authority to pressure newly transferred first-year teachers into overtime they had no obligation to perform, and that he had stood by while the seniority culture took hold — or had actively made it worse.

The court concluded that "even if the goal was the smooth operation of the school, pressuring subordinates into overtime against their will is difficult to justify," and that "corresponding sanctions are unavoidable."

The ruling has not yet been finalized. The principal has appealed, and the case is pending before the Seoul High Court.