Corporate trends / Performance record
Unfair Dismissal Case Concerning “Disciplinary Severity (Concurrent Position at Provincial Symphony Orchestra · Media Interview)” (Unfair Dismissal 379)
- Date2026/04/17 04:13
- Read 180
[Case Information]
This case is a decision in which the employer ultimately prevailed (dismissal of the application) on the issue of “disciplinary severity (concurrent position at a provincial symphony orchestra · media interview).”
Adjudicating body: Chungbuk Regional Labor Relations Commission
Case No. 2025부해9062 ○ ○ ○ Application for Remedy for Unfair Dismissal
Decision date: 2026.02.13 · Outcome: Application dismissed
Summary of key issues:
A. Existence of grounds for discipline
The employee’s violation of the duty to refrain from concurrent employment, violation of the duty to maintain dignity through a media interview, and workplace harassment were recognized as grounds for discipline under the Chungcheongbuk-do Provincial Symphony Orchestra Ordinance and the Chungcheongbuk-do Provincial Symphony Orchestra Members’ Service Regulations.
1. Legal Implications
Ⅰ. Case Overview
In this unfair dismissal case, a member of the Chungcheongbuk-do Provincial Symphony Orchestra was dismissed for violating the duty to refrain from concurrent employment, breaching the duty to maintain dignity in the course of a media interview, and engaging in workplace harassment, and then filed an application with the Labor Relations Commission for a remedy for unfair dismissal.
The Chungbuk Regional Labor Relations Commission examined whether these acts constituted grounds for discipline under the relevant ordinance and service regulations, the appropriateness of the level of discipline (disciplinary severity), and the lawfulness of the disciplinary procedures. After its hearing, the Commission dismissed the employee’s application for relief.
Ⅱ. Issues in Dispute
The issues in this case are:
“When a member of a provincial symphony orchestra violates obligations relating to the prohibition on concurrent employment, maintenance of dignity, and prohibition of workplace harassment, (i) whether such misconduct constitutes grounds for discipline under the applicable ordinance and service regulations; (ii) whether the imposition of dismissal as a disciplinary measure amounts to an unfair dismissal in that it is, by social norms, manifestly unreasonable in terms of disciplinary severity; and (iii) whether the failure to follow procedures under the Local Public Officials Act constitutes a procedural defect in the disciplinary process.”
Ⅲ. Summary of the Labor Relations Commission’s Reasoning
The adjudicating panel in this case found that the employee’s violation of the duty to refrain from concurrent employment, violation of the duty to maintain dignity through a media interview, and workplace harassment constituted grounds for discipline as set out in the Chungcheongbuk-do Provincial Symphony Orchestra Ordinance and the Members’ Service Regulations.
It further held that, under the case law principle that the legitimacy of disciplinary dismissal must be assessed comprehensively in light of the existence of grounds for discipline, the lawfulness of the procedure, and the appropriateness of the level of discipline, and that only where the measure is, by social norms, manifestly lacking in reasonableness should it be viewed as an abuse of discretion, it was difficult to regard the level of discipline in this case as excessive.
The panel also noted that the orchestra member did not hold the status of a local public official, making it difficult to view the procedures under the Local Public Officials Act as directly applicable, and that the disciplinary procedures prescribed by the ordinance and service regulations had been observed.
Accordingly, the Commission held that the dismissal in this case could not be regarded as manifestly unreasonable, by social norms, in the employer’s exercise of its disciplinary authority, and that the procedures complied with the relevant rules. It therefore found that the dismissal was not unfair.
Ⅳ. Practical Points (From the Employee’s Perspective)
From the employee’s standpoint, even if one is not a public official, where one belongs to a highly public institution such as a provincial symphony orchestra, one must bear in mind that obligations concerning prohibition on concurrent employment, maintenance of dignity, and prohibition of workplace harassment set out in ordinances and service regulations may be applied very strictly.
In particular, media interviews, external activities, and words and conduct toward colleagues may be evaluated as grounds for discipline that disrupt organizational order. It is therefore safer to check the applicable rules in advance and, where necessary, consult with the employer beforehand.
Ⅴ. Practical Points (From the Employer’s (Company’s) Perspective)
From the employer’s perspective, it is important to clearly specify rules on prohibition of concurrent employment, maintenance of dignity, and workplace harassment in ordinances, work rules, and service regulations, and to clearly notify members and employees of these standards in advance through training.
In addition, even where multiple instances of misconduct are present, when determining the level of discipline, the employer should comprehensively consider the nature and degree of the misconduct, its impact on organizational order, and the public nature of the institution, and set the level of discipline so that it is not evaluated, by social norms, as manifestly excessive.
For the employer’s arguments to be upheld at the Labor Relations Commission stage in cases of this type, it is necessary to adopt a systematic strategy to prove that: (i) the grounds for discipline are clearly based on the applicable rules; (ii) the disciplinary procedures were conducted in accordance with those rules; and (iii) the level of discipline does not cross the “manifest loss of reasonableness by social norms” threshold articulated in Supreme Court precedent.
2. Matters Adjudicated
A. Case Overview and Procedural History
A. Existence of grounds for discipline
The employee’s violation of the duty to refrain from concurrent employment, violation of the duty to maintain dignity through a media interview, and workplace harassment were recognized as grounds for discipline under the Chungcheongbuk-do Provincial Symphony Orchestra Ordinance and the Chungcheongbuk-do Provincial Symphony Orchestra Members’ Service Regulations.
B. Appropriateness of the level of discipline
It is difficult to view the employer’s dismissal of the employee as a disciplinary measure as an abuse of discretion that, by social norms, is manifestly lacking in reasonableness.
C. Lawfulness of the disciplinary procedures
The employee does not hold the status of a public official under the Local Public Officials Act, and thus it is difficult to regard the procedures set out in that Act as applicable. It was determined that lawful procedures under the relevant rules were followed.
3. Summary of the Decision
A. Summary of the Labor Relations Commission’s Reasoning
A. Existence of grounds for discipline
The employee’s violation of the duty to refrain from concurrent employment, violation of the duty to maintain dignity through a media interview, and workplace harassment were recognized as grounds for discipline under the Chungcheongbuk-do Provincial Symphony Orchestra Ordinance and the Chungcheongbuk-do Provincial Symphony Orchestra Members’ Service Regulations.
B. Appropriateness of the level of discipline
It is difficult to view the employer’s dismissal of the employee as a disciplinary measure as an abuse of discretion that, by social norms, is manifestly lacking in reasonableness.
C. Lawfulness of the disciplinary procedures
The employee does not hold the status of a public official under the Local Public Officials Act, and thus it is difficult to regard the procedures set out in that Act as applicable. It was determined that lawful procedures under the relevant rules were followed. /
[See More Related Decisions]
- “Unfair Dismissal Decision Concerning ‘Non-Existence of Expectation of Renewal (Refusal to Renew Contract Beyond Mandatory Retirement Age)’”
- “Unfair Dismissal Decision Concerning ‘Dismissal During Probation (Refusal to Report to Work After Workplace Harassment)’”
- “Unfair Dismissal Decision Concerning ‘Failure to Satisfy Requirements for Redundancy Dismissal (Workout Company)’”
[Tags]
Unfair dismissal, disciplinary severity (concurrent position at provincial symphony orchestra · media interview), disciplinary dismissal, workplace harassment, violation of company policy · non-compliance with work instructions, Labor Law Firm Law&, large labor law firm, Samseong-dong labor law firm, Samseong Station labor law firm, Gangnam labor law firm
※ This article is part of Labor Law Firm Law&’s “Unfair Dismissal Decisions” series.
※ You can view the previous article, “Unfair Dismissal Decision Concerning ‘Non-Existence of Expectation of Renewal (Refusal to Renew Contract Beyond Mandatory Retirement Age)’,” in a new window.
※ You can also view the list of decisions related to disciplinary severity (concurrent position at provincial symphony orchestra · media interview) in the “List of Decisions Related to Disciplinary Severity (Concurrent Position at Provincial Symphony Orchestra · Media Interview).”
※ Korean version of this case: Korean article
This case is a decision in which the employer ultimately prevailed (dismissal of the application) on the issue of “disciplinary severity (concurrent position at a provincial symphony orchestra · media interview).”
Adjudicating body: Chungbuk Regional Labor Relations Commission
Case No. 2025부해9062 ○ ○ ○ Application for Remedy for Unfair Dismissal
Decision date: 2026.02.13 · Outcome: Application dismissed
Summary of key issues:
A. Existence of grounds for discipline
The employee’s violation of the duty to refrain from concurrent employment, violation of the duty to maintain dignity through a media interview, and workplace harassment were recognized as grounds for discipline under the Chungcheongbuk-do Provincial Symphony Orchestra Ordinance and the Chungcheongbuk-do Provincial Symphony Orchestra Members’ Service Regulations.
1. Legal Implications
Ⅰ. Case Overview
In this unfair dismissal case, a member of the Chungcheongbuk-do Provincial Symphony Orchestra was dismissed for violating the duty to refrain from concurrent employment, breaching the duty to maintain dignity in the course of a media interview, and engaging in workplace harassment, and then filed an application with the Labor Relations Commission for a remedy for unfair dismissal.
The Chungbuk Regional Labor Relations Commission examined whether these acts constituted grounds for discipline under the relevant ordinance and service regulations, the appropriateness of the level of discipline (disciplinary severity), and the lawfulness of the disciplinary procedures. After its hearing, the Commission dismissed the employee’s application for relief.
Ⅱ. Issues in Dispute
The issues in this case are:
“When a member of a provincial symphony orchestra violates obligations relating to the prohibition on concurrent employment, maintenance of dignity, and prohibition of workplace harassment, (i) whether such misconduct constitutes grounds for discipline under the applicable ordinance and service regulations; (ii) whether the imposition of dismissal as a disciplinary measure amounts to an unfair dismissal in that it is, by social norms, manifestly unreasonable in terms of disciplinary severity; and (iii) whether the failure to follow procedures under the Local Public Officials Act constitutes a procedural defect in the disciplinary process.”
Ⅲ. Summary of the Labor Relations Commission’s Reasoning
The adjudicating panel in this case found that the employee’s violation of the duty to refrain from concurrent employment, violation of the duty to maintain dignity through a media interview, and workplace harassment constituted grounds for discipline as set out in the Chungcheongbuk-do Provincial Symphony Orchestra Ordinance and the Members’ Service Regulations.
It further held that, under the case law principle that the legitimacy of disciplinary dismissal must be assessed comprehensively in light of the existence of grounds for discipline, the lawfulness of the procedure, and the appropriateness of the level of discipline, and that only where the measure is, by social norms, manifestly lacking in reasonableness should it be viewed as an abuse of discretion, it was difficult to regard the level of discipline in this case as excessive.
The panel also noted that the orchestra member did not hold the status of a local public official, making it difficult to view the procedures under the Local Public Officials Act as directly applicable, and that the disciplinary procedures prescribed by the ordinance and service regulations had been observed.
Accordingly, the Commission held that the dismissal in this case could not be regarded as manifestly unreasonable, by social norms, in the employer’s exercise of its disciplinary authority, and that the procedures complied with the relevant rules. It therefore found that the dismissal was not unfair.
Ⅳ. Practical Points (From the Employee’s Perspective)
From the employee’s standpoint, even if one is not a public official, where one belongs to a highly public institution such as a provincial symphony orchestra, one must bear in mind that obligations concerning prohibition on concurrent employment, maintenance of dignity, and prohibition of workplace harassment set out in ordinances and service regulations may be applied very strictly.
In particular, media interviews, external activities, and words and conduct toward colleagues may be evaluated as grounds for discipline that disrupt organizational order. It is therefore safer to check the applicable rules in advance and, where necessary, consult with the employer beforehand.
Ⅴ. Practical Points (From the Employer’s (Company’s) Perspective)
From the employer’s perspective, it is important to clearly specify rules on prohibition of concurrent employment, maintenance of dignity, and workplace harassment in ordinances, work rules, and service regulations, and to clearly notify members and employees of these standards in advance through training.
In addition, even where multiple instances of misconduct are present, when determining the level of discipline, the employer should comprehensively consider the nature and degree of the misconduct, its impact on organizational order, and the public nature of the institution, and set the level of discipline so that it is not evaluated, by social norms, as manifestly excessive.
For the employer’s arguments to be upheld at the Labor Relations Commission stage in cases of this type, it is necessary to adopt a systematic strategy to prove that: (i) the grounds for discipline are clearly based on the applicable rules; (ii) the disciplinary procedures were conducted in accordance with those rules; and (iii) the level of discipline does not cross the “manifest loss of reasonableness by social norms” threshold articulated in Supreme Court precedent.
2. Matters Adjudicated
A. Case Overview and Procedural History
A. Existence of grounds for discipline
The employee’s violation of the duty to refrain from concurrent employment, violation of the duty to maintain dignity through a media interview, and workplace harassment were recognized as grounds for discipline under the Chungcheongbuk-do Provincial Symphony Orchestra Ordinance and the Chungcheongbuk-do Provincial Symphony Orchestra Members’ Service Regulations.
B. Appropriateness of the level of discipline
It is difficult to view the employer’s dismissal of the employee as a disciplinary measure as an abuse of discretion that, by social norms, is manifestly lacking in reasonableness.
C. Lawfulness of the disciplinary procedures
The employee does not hold the status of a public official under the Local Public Officials Act, and thus it is difficult to regard the procedures set out in that Act as applicable. It was determined that lawful procedures under the relevant rules were followed.
3. Summary of the Decision
A. Summary of the Labor Relations Commission’s Reasoning
A. Existence of grounds for discipline
The employee’s violation of the duty to refrain from concurrent employment, violation of the duty to maintain dignity through a media interview, and workplace harassment were recognized as grounds for discipline under the Chungcheongbuk-do Provincial Symphony Orchestra Ordinance and the Chungcheongbuk-do Provincial Symphony Orchestra Members’ Service Regulations.
B. Appropriateness of the level of discipline
It is difficult to view the employer’s dismissal of the employee as a disciplinary measure as an abuse of discretion that, by social norms, is manifestly lacking in reasonableness.
C. Lawfulness of the disciplinary procedures
The employee does not hold the status of a public official under the Local Public Officials Act, and thus it is difficult to regard the procedures set out in that Act as applicable. It was determined that lawful procedures under the relevant rules were followed. /
[See More Related Decisions]
- “Unfair Dismissal Decision Concerning ‘Non-Existence of Expectation of Renewal (Refusal to Renew Contract Beyond Mandatory Retirement Age)’”
- “Unfair Dismissal Decision Concerning ‘Dismissal During Probation (Refusal to Report to Work After Workplace Harassment)’”
- “Unfair Dismissal Decision Concerning ‘Failure to Satisfy Requirements for Redundancy Dismissal (Workout Company)’”
[Tags]
Unfair dismissal, disciplinary severity (concurrent position at provincial symphony orchestra · media interview), disciplinary dismissal, workplace harassment, violation of company policy · non-compliance with work instructions, Labor Law Firm Law&, large labor law firm, Samseong-dong labor law firm, Samseong Station labor law firm, Gangnam labor law firm
※ This article is part of Labor Law Firm Law&’s “Unfair Dismissal Decisions” series.
※ You can view the previous article, “Unfair Dismissal Decision Concerning ‘Non-Existence of Expectation of Renewal (Refusal to Renew Contract Beyond Mandatory Retirement Age)’,” in a new window.
※ You can also view the list of decisions related to disciplinary severity (concurrent position at provincial symphony orchestra · media interview) in the “List of Decisions Related to Disciplinary Severity (Concurrent Position at Provincial Symphony Orchestra · Media Interview).”
※ Korean version of this case: Korean article
