Coast Guard officer who made threats, insubordinate remarks loses dismissal challenge

A court has ruled that the dismissal of a Korea Coast Guard officer who made insubordinate remarks to his direct superior — including "How long have you even been in the Coast Guard?" and calling his work "a mess" — was justified. Beyond the insubordination, the officer was found to have insulted colleagues, filed multiple complaints against fellow staff members and engaged in conduct that undermined unit cohesion.

The Busan District Court's Administrative Division 1-2, presided over by Judge Moon Chun-eon, ruled against former Korea Coast Guard officer A in his lawsuit seeking to overturn his dismissal, issuing the decision in July. A was also ordered to bear the litigation costs.

According to the facts established by the court, A was removed from office in January last year after a disciplinary committee investigation found he had committed 10 violations of his duty to maintain professional conduct.

Among the violations, A was found to have made insubordinate remarks to his direct superior while applying for personal uniform items, asking "How long have you even been in the Coast Guard?"

He also claimed he had been "forcibly selected" for a training program he had voluntarily joined, filed 25 complaints against the staff involved and made false tip-offs to the media in connection with the matter. During this process, he sent a threatening letter to the training coordinator, warning that unless the coordinator paid 20 million won ($14,700) in consolation money, he would demand severe disciplinary action and file a 100 million won damages claim.

When his sick leave was not approved as work-related recuperation, A verbally abused the official in charge, saying "Do your job properly" and threatening that "refusing would constitute dereliction of duty." He then filed a complaint against and threatened the civil servant handling the subsequent administrative litigation. The victim sought hospital treatment for psychological harm.

Throughout this process, A filed 153 reports with the national civil petition portal or submitted information disclosure requests, claiming he was a victim of workplace harassment. Whenever his claims were rejected during legal proceedings, he repeatedly filed complaints against the investigating officers, prosecutors and judges involved, alleging dereliction of duty.

A contested the removal. The Civil Service Appeals Commission excluded some of the disciplinary grounds on the basis that the statute of limitations had expired and reduced the penalty from removal to dismissal.

A then filed a lawsuit in April last year, refusing to accept even the reduced dismissal.

During the trial, A argued that no grounds for disciplinary action existed and denied any acts of extortion, threats or verbal abuse. He also claimed he had suffered far greater distress than the victims and that the disciplinary measure was excessively harsh.

The court rejected A's arguments, finding that all grounds for disciplinary action were established and that the level of punishment was appropriate.

The court said A had "attempted to extort threats or money from the Korea Coast Guard organization as a whole or from individual members, falling short only because the attempts were unsuccessful, and committed a form of insubordination by verbally abusing his direct superior."

The court also said A had "intentionally committed repeated and continuous misconduct," adding that under disciplinary guidelines, the violations were serious and deliberate, leaving no room for leniency.

The court further noted that the gravity of the violations was especially serious given that A was a civil servant in a police organization with a relatively strict chain of command, whose purpose is to investigate and prevent crime.

The first-instance ruling noted that A had continued to repeat the same type of conduct even after his dismissal — including filing a complaint against the chair of the Civil Service Appeals Commission — and showed no sign of remorse.

The court concluded that there was a need to prevent recurrence of similar cases and to restore discipline within the Korea Coast Guard, and that the dismissal could not be regarded as unjust.

The ruling was finalized on Aug. 6, after A chose not to appeal.