Employee Who Spit on Food and Forced Developmentally Disabled Colleague to Eat It

In a shocking incident where a government employee affiliated with the National Assembly Secretariat was dismissed for forcing a developmentally disabled colleague to eat food that had been spat on, the court ruled that the dismissal was justified.

According to legal circles on the 23rd, the 7th Administrative Division of the Seoul High Court recently dismissed the appeal of A, a former level 8 employee of the National Assembly Secretariat, against his 'dismissal cancellation lawsuit.'

The court determined that A's actions seriously violated the duties expected of a civil servant.

A, who joined the National Assembly Secretariat in 2006, had continuously harassed a severely developmentally disabled colleague with whom he worked since 2010.

A had repeatedly made the victim run personal errands such as buying ramen and kimbap, and ordered them to wash the socks of the assembly members by hand. He also forced the victim to sing or made them turn off the lights in the workplace, instilling a sense of fear in the developmentally disabled victim.

Severity of Workplace Bullying and Court's Judgment

A's harassment escalated to a serious level beyond mere work instructions. In April 2021, he spat on a rice cake given to the victim and, in July of the same year, shockingly forced the victim to drink from a water bottle that he had spat in.

Even more alarming was the revelation that A, in a KakaoTalk conversation with a colleague, stated that he had "made another colleague drink protein powder mixed with powdered detergent and pencil lead, causing abdominal pain and meningitis," and remarked, "We need to make (the victim) eat some detergent."

This information was exposed when colleague C submitted the KakaoTalk messages to the investigative committee, leading the National Assembly Secretariat to dismiss A in 2023 after disciplinary procedures, citing workplace bullying, assault, property damage, and violation of duties to maintain dignity.

A argued in court that he did not have an advantageous position over the victim, and therefore, workplace bullying could not be established, but the court did not accept this claim.

The court concluded, "The victim was a civil service worker (contractual employee), and considering that A was older than the victim and had worked for about four more years, as well as the fact that the victim is a severely developmentally disabled person, there is a superior position in terms of rank or relationship."

Additionally, A claimed that he was not subject to disciplinary action because he was acquitted in criminal proceedings due to lack of evidence regarding the allegations of spitting on the rice cake and water. However, the court stated, "Even if an acquittal was pronounced in a criminal judgment, the assessment of whether a civil servant violated the duty of sincerity is a separate matter."

Ultimately, the court concluded, "The misconduct described is an act that is difficult to imagine occurring within a public office, and given that the primary victim was a person with a disability, it is seriously damaging to public trust in the civil service," and affirmed the justification of the dismissal.

This incident has served as a reminder of the seriousness of workplace bullying and discrimination against individuals with disabilities, and it has been evaluated as a ruling that emphasizes the importance of ethical awareness and the duty to maintain dignity in the public sector.

Image source: Unrelated stock photo / gettyimagesbank