Buddhist foundation unjustly punished harassment victim
A major Buddhist foundation was ruled by a Seoul court to have unjustly disciplined an employee who had been previously sexually harassed by the foundation’s chairman.
The Seoul Administrative Court said Monday that it had dismissed a suit filed by the foundation to overturn a decision by the Central Labor Relations Commission (CLRC) that found the punishment of the employee was unfair.
In 2016, shortly after joining the foundation’s finance department, the employee was sexually harassed on three occasions by the chairman, a monk. The employee took a leave of absence for medical treatment and was unable to work for a period of time. In November of that year, the foundation attempted to fire the employee, citing unauthorized absences, but the CLRC opposed the move.
The sexual harassment was legally acknowledged when the chairman was convicted in January 2018 and sentenced to six months in prison, suspended for two years. The verdict was upheld by the Supreme Court in January 2019. While legal proceedings were ongoing, the foundation reassigned the employee to a position at a cultural memorial hall, unrelated to their original duties ? a move that was later deemed discriminatory. The foundation was fined 2 million won ($1,470) for marginalizing the victim by assigning them unrelated work.
Despite repeated requests to return to the original position and be treated fairly, the foundation chose to discipline the employee instead. In November 2023, the foundation’s disciplinary committee handed down a two-month suspension, citing 19 incidents, including telling a senior official to “go back to elementary school,” stretching legs on a chair during work, arriving before the security team to activate building systems and spraying water in front of the building.
The employee reported her treatment and claimed the punishment was unjust. The Seoul Regional Labor Relations Commission found the disciplinary action excessive and ordered the foundation to reverse it. The Buddhist foundation appealed, but the CLRC upheld the lower body’s decision. The foundation then filed an administrative lawsuit seeking to overturn the ruling.
The court sided with the employee and the CLRC. It found that 18 of the 19 alleged infractions were not valid grounds for discipline. For instance, stretching legs on a chair was seen as a result of being made to work at the cultural memorial hall without a designated workstation or proper break area ? not as a disciplinary issue.
The only action recognized as disciplinary was the comment made to the senior official. However, the court noted that the employee had felt ostracized by colleagues since reporting the harassment and was reacting to verbal abuse from the official. The court said this context warranted consideration.
“Suspension exceeded the foundation’s discretionary authority and was therefore unlawful,” ruled the court. "The CLRC’s decision finding the suspension unjust was thus reasonable in its conclusion, and the foundation’s suit is dismissed."