Professor who punched colleague has dismissal upheld by Supreme Court

South Korea's Supreme Court has overturned lower court rulings that sided with a professor dismissed from a private university after punching a colleague while drunk. The lower courts found the dismissal unlawful, but the Supreme Court found no sufficient basis to regard the dismissal as improper and sent the case back for retrial.

The Supreme Court's First Division, presided over by Justice Seo Gyeong-hwan, vacated the lower court's ruling in favor of the plaintiff — a man in his 50s who had served as an assistant professor at a private university in Seoul — and remanded the case to Seoul High Court on July 16. The man, identified only as A, had filed suit against the Teachers' Appeals Review Committee seeking to cancel its decision.

According to facts established by the court, A punched the jaw of a fellow professor, a woman in her 40s identified as B, at a drinking gathering in June 2022. B had previously served as department head. B sustained bruising and sprains requiring two weeks of treatment as a result of the assault.

A was indicted on assault charges and stood trial in criminal court. During those proceedings, it emerged that a dispute over a promotion lay at the heart of the conflict between the two. A became enraged when B explained the reasons he had not been promoted, and struck her.

In April 2023, a criminal court of first instance found A guilty of assault and sentenced him to a fine of 1 million won ($694). A appealed, arguing he had never injured B and that her testimony was inconsistent, but the appeals court rejected his appeal in July of the following year, upholding the original verdict. The Supreme Court dismissed A's final appeal in November 2024, making the criminal conviction final.

The university where A was employed convened a disciplinary committee, which concluded that A's conduct had damaged the dignity befitting a faculty member and notified him of his dismissal in February 2023. A filed a teachers' appeals review petition seeking cancellation or reduction of the dismissal, but the university rejected it in May of that year. A then filed suit against the Teachers' Appeals Review Committee to cancel its decision.

The administrative court of first instance ruled in A's favor in February last year, finding the university's dismissal unlawful.

The first-instance court acknowledged that "the plaintiff (A) violated his duty to maintain professional dignity by injuring the victim (B), a fellow faculty member," but held that "taking into account the nature and content of the misconduct, the extent of the injury, and the level of criminal punishment, the dismissal constitutes an excessively severe disciplinary measure relative to the degree of misconduct, violating the principle of proportionality and deviating from or abusing discretionary authority to a degree that is manifestly unreasonable by common social standards, rendering it unlawful."

The first-instance court cited three factors in its reasoning: that B's injuries did not appear severe enough to leave lasting damage or aftereffects beyond simple outpatient treatment; that A's act appeared to have been an impulsive reaction triggered by B's remarks; and that A's conduct had no direct connection to his official duties and, given the circumstances and the extent of the harm, could not readily be seen as likely to undermine public trust in the teaching profession as a whole.

The appellate court upheld that ruling in January this year, stating it was difficult to conclude that the misconduct "clearly constituted a case of serious misconduct committed with intent" — the standard that would warrant dismissal or removal from office.

The Supreme Court, however, reached a different conclusion.

The Supreme Court ruled last month that it was "difficult to regard the dismissal in this case as manifestly unreasonable by common social standards or as a deviation from or abuse of discretionary authority in determining the appropriate disciplinary measure."

The court said the misconduct "involved A punching a sunbae professor and colleague in the face, causing jaw bruising and other injuries requiring two weeks of treatment," and that "in light of the relationship between the two parties, the manner of the act, and the location of the injury, it is difficult to view the degree of misconduct as minor."

The Supreme Court also addressed the finalized criminal case. The court noted that A "was convicted of assault in the related criminal proceedings and sentenced to a fine of 1 million won, a verdict that became final — yet throughout that process, despite consistent testimony from B and a witness, he denied ever having struck B and showed no remorse." The court added that even in the current administrative proceedings, A "has done nothing more than emphasize that B was largely to blame for provoking the incident." The court concluded that "it is reasonable to regard this as a case of serious misconduct committed with intent, and the dismissal in this case is consistent with the applicable disciplinary standards."