Corporate trends / Performance record
Unfair Dismissal Case on “Disciplinary Severity (Insulting a Complainant While on Sick Leave)” (Unfair Dismissal 513)
- Date2026/07/02 04:11
- Read 23
This case on the issue of “disciplinary severity (insulting a complainant while on sick leave)” ended with a decision in favor of the employer (dismissal of the application).
Adjudicating body: Jeonnam Regional Labor Relations Commission, 2026Buhae394 ○ ○ ○ Application for Remedy for Unfair Dismissal
Decision date: 2026-06-10 · Case result: Dismissed
Summary of key issues:
A. Existence of grounds for discipline
The employee’s (i) “conduct of using abusive language and other inappropriate expressions toward a complainant in the course of handling a personal accident while on sick leave,” (ii) “failure to comply with work instructions such as reporting on the progress of preparations for the labor‑management council,” and (iii) “refusal to comply with a superior’s work‑related instructions and leaving the workplace following an unauthorized absence without just cause” were found to violate Articles 7, 8, and 12 of the service regulations, and therefore constituted just grounds for discipline.
1. Legal Implications
Ⅰ. Case Overview
In this unfair dismissal case, an employee on sick leave was subjected to disciplinary dismissal on the grounds that: (i) in the course of handling a personal accident while on sick leave, the employee used abusive language and otherwise behaved inappropriately toward a complainant; (ii) the employee failed to comply with work instructions related to preparations for the labor‑management council; and (iii) the employee engaged in unauthorized absence, refused to comply with a superior’s work‑related instructions, and left the workplace. The employee applied to the Labor Relations Commission for a remedy, claiming that this disciplinary dismissal constituted unfair dismissal. However, the Jeonnam Regional Labor Relations Commission ruled in favor of the employer and dismissed the application.
Ⅱ. Summary of Issues
The issue in this case is:
“In circumstances where violations of service regulations due to insulting a complainant while on sick leave, noncompliance with work instructions, unauthorized absence, and leaving the workplace are established, whether the resulting disciplinary dismissal is justified in terms of both the existence of grounds for discipline and the severity of the disciplinary measure.”
Ⅲ. Summary of the Labor Relations Commission’s Reasoning
The adjudicating panel in this case found that the employee’s conduct—namely, using abusive language and otherwise behaving inappropriately toward a complainant while on sick leave, failing to comply with work instructions related to the labor‑management council, engaging in unauthorized absence without just cause, refusing to comply with a superior’s work‑related instructions, and leaving the workplace—violated Articles 7, 8, and 12 of the service regulations, and therefore constituted just grounds for discipline.
Among these, “Ground for Discipline 1” alone was found to involve intent, and under the rules of employment the minimum disciplinary sanction for such conduct was set as “suspension.” While discipline must be proportionate and socially acceptable in light of the relationship between the grounds for discipline and the sanction imposed, considering the nature and circumstances of the misconduct in this case and its impact on corporate order, the Commission found it difficult to conclude that the disciplinary dismissal was so excessively severe as to constitute an abuse of discretion.
Accordingly, the Commission held that the dismissal in this case was not an unfair dismissal, on the grounds that valid disciplinary reasons existed and that the severity of the disciplinary measure could not be regarded as having clearly lost its reasonableness in light of social norms.
Ⅳ. Practical Points (From the Employee’s Perspective)
Even while on sick leave, an employee is not completely released from basic service obligations such as responding to complainants, complying with a superior’s lawful instructions, and observing attendance obligations. Conduct that directly undermines corporate order—such as using abusive language, unauthorized absence, and refusal to follow instructions—can lead to disciplinary dismissal.
In addition, where multiple acts of misconduct accumulate, they may operate as aggravating factors in determining the level of discipline. It is therefore important, at an early stage, to submit a written explanation, offer an apology, and make efforts to remedy any harm, thereby clearly demonstrating remorse and a willingness to reform, in order to mitigate the level of disciplinary action.
Ⅴ. Practical Points (From the Employer/Company’s Perspective)
From the employer’s standpoint, it is advisable to set out in detail, within the service regulations and disciplinary guidelines, the types of misconduct—such as use of abusive language, unauthorized absence, and noncompliance with work instructions—and the corresponding levels of disciplinary sanctions. In actual disciplinary cases, adhering to these standards to ensure proportionality and fairness will make it easier for the Labor Relations Commission to recognize the legitimacy of the measures.
Furthermore, it is crucial to secure sufficient evidence of the existence of the grounds for discipline and to strictly comply with disciplinary procedures (such as providing an opportunity to be heard and properly constituting and voting within the disciplinary committee), so as not to leave any procedural defects. This is key to preventing disputes over unfair dismissal.
To prevail at the Labor Relations Commission stage in unfair dismissal or redundancy dismissal disputes of this type, it is essential to have an accurate understanding of the legal principles surrounding the existence of grounds for discipline, the proportionality of disciplinary severity, and the lawfulness of disciplinary procedures. From the outset of the case, you should organize the facts and establish an evidentiary strategy together with experts such as Labor Law Firm Law&.
2. Matters Adjudicated
A. Case Overview and Procedural History
A. Existence of Grounds for Discipline
The employee’s (i) “conduct of using abusive language and other inappropriate expressions toward a complainant in the course of handling a personal accident while on sick leave,” (ii) “failure to comply with work instructions such as reporting on the progress of preparations for the labor‑management council,” and (iii) “refusal to comply with a superior’s work‑related instructions and leaving the workplace following an unauthorized absence without just cause” were found to violate Articles 7, 8, and 12 of the service regulations, and therefore constituted just grounds for discipline.
B. Appropriateness of the Level of Discipline
Even the conduct constituting the employee’s “Ground for Discipline 1” alone was found to be intentional, and the disciplinary guidelines set the minimum sanction for such conduct as “suspension.” Although the employee showed some remorse and willingness to reform…
3. Summary of Decision
A. Summary of the Labor Relations Commission’s Reasoning
A. Existence of Grounds for Discipline
The employee’s (i) “conduct of using abusive language and other inappropriate expressions toward a complainant in the course of handling a personal accident while on sick leave,” (ii) “failure to comply with work instructions such as reporting on the progress of preparations for the labor‑management council,” and (iii) “refusal to comply with a superior’s work‑related instructions and leaving the workplace following an unauthorized absence without just cause” were found to violate Articles 7, 8, and 12 of the service regulations, and therefore constituted just grounds for discipline.
B. Appropriateness of the Level of Discipline
Even the conduct constituting the employee’s “Ground for Discipline 1” alone was found to be intentional, and the disciplinary guidelines set the minimum sanction for such conduct as “suspension.” Although the employee showed some remorse and willingness to reform… /
[Further Related Decisions]
- “Unfair Dismissal Case on ‘Voluntary Resignation (No Withdrawal of Resignation Letter)’”
- “Unfair Dismissal Case on ‘Dismissal (Failure to Appear at Hearing)’” – Decision date: – Case result: Dismissed
- “Unfair Dismissal Case on ‘Failure to Meet Requirements for Redundancy Dismissal (Workout Company)’”
[Tags]
Unfair dismissal, disciplinary severity (insulting a complainant while on sick leave), disciplinary dismissal, unauthorized absence, violation of company policies · noncompliance 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 the “Unfair Dismissal Decisions” series by Labor Law Firm Law&.
※ The previous article, “Unfair Dismissal Case on ‘Voluntary Resignation (No Withdrawal of Resignation Letter)’,” can be viewed in a new window.
※ The list of decisions related to disciplinary severity (insulting a complainant while on sick leave) can be viewed together in the “List of Decisions Related to Disciplinary Severity (Insulting a Complainant While on Sick Leave).”
※ Korean version of this case: Korean article
Adjudicating body: Jeonnam Regional Labor Relations Commission, 2026Buhae394 ○ ○ ○ Application for Remedy for Unfair Dismissal
Decision date: 2026-06-10 · Case result: Dismissed
Summary of key issues:
A. Existence of grounds for discipline
The employee’s (i) “conduct of using abusive language and other inappropriate expressions toward a complainant in the course of handling a personal accident while on sick leave,” (ii) “failure to comply with work instructions such as reporting on the progress of preparations for the labor‑management council,” and (iii) “refusal to comply with a superior’s work‑related instructions and leaving the workplace following an unauthorized absence without just cause” were found to violate Articles 7, 8, and 12 of the service regulations, and therefore constituted just grounds for discipline.
1. Legal Implications
Ⅰ. Case Overview
In this unfair dismissal case, an employee on sick leave was subjected to disciplinary dismissal on the grounds that: (i) in the course of handling a personal accident while on sick leave, the employee used abusive language and otherwise behaved inappropriately toward a complainant; (ii) the employee failed to comply with work instructions related to preparations for the labor‑management council; and (iii) the employee engaged in unauthorized absence, refused to comply with a superior’s work‑related instructions, and left the workplace. The employee applied to the Labor Relations Commission for a remedy, claiming that this disciplinary dismissal constituted unfair dismissal. However, the Jeonnam Regional Labor Relations Commission ruled in favor of the employer and dismissed the application.
Ⅱ. Summary of Issues
The issue in this case is:
“In circumstances where violations of service regulations due to insulting a complainant while on sick leave, noncompliance with work instructions, unauthorized absence, and leaving the workplace are established, whether the resulting disciplinary dismissal is justified in terms of both the existence of grounds for discipline and the severity of the disciplinary measure.”
Ⅲ. Summary of the Labor Relations Commission’s Reasoning
The adjudicating panel in this case found that the employee’s conduct—namely, using abusive language and otherwise behaving inappropriately toward a complainant while on sick leave, failing to comply with work instructions related to the labor‑management council, engaging in unauthorized absence without just cause, refusing to comply with a superior’s work‑related instructions, and leaving the workplace—violated Articles 7, 8, and 12 of the service regulations, and therefore constituted just grounds for discipline.
Among these, “Ground for Discipline 1” alone was found to involve intent, and under the rules of employment the minimum disciplinary sanction for such conduct was set as “suspension.” While discipline must be proportionate and socially acceptable in light of the relationship between the grounds for discipline and the sanction imposed, considering the nature and circumstances of the misconduct in this case and its impact on corporate order, the Commission found it difficult to conclude that the disciplinary dismissal was so excessively severe as to constitute an abuse of discretion.
Accordingly, the Commission held that the dismissal in this case was not an unfair dismissal, on the grounds that valid disciplinary reasons existed and that the severity of the disciplinary measure could not be regarded as having clearly lost its reasonableness in light of social norms.
Ⅳ. Practical Points (From the Employee’s Perspective)
Even while on sick leave, an employee is not completely released from basic service obligations such as responding to complainants, complying with a superior’s lawful instructions, and observing attendance obligations. Conduct that directly undermines corporate order—such as using abusive language, unauthorized absence, and refusal to follow instructions—can lead to disciplinary dismissal.
In addition, where multiple acts of misconduct accumulate, they may operate as aggravating factors in determining the level of discipline. It is therefore important, at an early stage, to submit a written explanation, offer an apology, and make efforts to remedy any harm, thereby clearly demonstrating remorse and a willingness to reform, in order to mitigate the level of disciplinary action.
Ⅴ. Practical Points (From the Employer/Company’s Perspective)
From the employer’s standpoint, it is advisable to set out in detail, within the service regulations and disciplinary guidelines, the types of misconduct—such as use of abusive language, unauthorized absence, and noncompliance with work instructions—and the corresponding levels of disciplinary sanctions. In actual disciplinary cases, adhering to these standards to ensure proportionality and fairness will make it easier for the Labor Relations Commission to recognize the legitimacy of the measures.
Furthermore, it is crucial to secure sufficient evidence of the existence of the grounds for discipline and to strictly comply with disciplinary procedures (such as providing an opportunity to be heard and properly constituting and voting within the disciplinary committee), so as not to leave any procedural defects. This is key to preventing disputes over unfair dismissal.
To prevail at the Labor Relations Commission stage in unfair dismissal or redundancy dismissal disputes of this type, it is essential to have an accurate understanding of the legal principles surrounding the existence of grounds for discipline, the proportionality of disciplinary severity, and the lawfulness of disciplinary procedures. From the outset of the case, you should organize the facts and establish an evidentiary strategy together with experts such as Labor Law Firm Law&.
2. Matters Adjudicated
A. Case Overview and Procedural History
A. Existence of Grounds for Discipline
The employee’s (i) “conduct of using abusive language and other inappropriate expressions toward a complainant in the course of handling a personal accident while on sick leave,” (ii) “failure to comply with work instructions such as reporting on the progress of preparations for the labor‑management council,” and (iii) “refusal to comply with a superior’s work‑related instructions and leaving the workplace following an unauthorized absence without just cause” were found to violate Articles 7, 8, and 12 of the service regulations, and therefore constituted just grounds for discipline.
B. Appropriateness of the Level of Discipline
Even the conduct constituting the employee’s “Ground for Discipline 1” alone was found to be intentional, and the disciplinary guidelines set the minimum sanction for such conduct as “suspension.” Although the employee showed some remorse and willingness to reform…
3. Summary of Decision
A. Summary of the Labor Relations Commission’s Reasoning
A. Existence of Grounds for Discipline
The employee’s (i) “conduct of using abusive language and other inappropriate expressions toward a complainant in the course of handling a personal accident while on sick leave,” (ii) “failure to comply with work instructions such as reporting on the progress of preparations for the labor‑management council,” and (iii) “refusal to comply with a superior’s work‑related instructions and leaving the workplace following an unauthorized absence without just cause” were found to violate Articles 7, 8, and 12 of the service regulations, and therefore constituted just grounds for discipline.
B. Appropriateness of the Level of Discipline
Even the conduct constituting the employee’s “Ground for Discipline 1” alone was found to be intentional, and the disciplinary guidelines set the minimum sanction for such conduct as “suspension.” Although the employee showed some remorse and willingness to reform… /
[Further Related Decisions]
- “Unfair Dismissal Case on ‘Voluntary Resignation (No Withdrawal of Resignation Letter)’”
- “Unfair Dismissal Case on ‘Dismissal (Failure to Appear at Hearing)’” – Decision date: – Case result: Dismissed
- “Unfair Dismissal Case on ‘Failure to Meet Requirements for Redundancy Dismissal (Workout Company)’”
[Tags]
Unfair dismissal, disciplinary severity (insulting a complainant while on sick leave), disciplinary dismissal, unauthorized absence, violation of company policies · noncompliance 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 the “Unfair Dismissal Decisions” series by Labor Law Firm Law&.
※ The previous article, “Unfair Dismissal Case on ‘Voluntary Resignation (No Withdrawal of Resignation Letter)’,” can be viewed in a new window.
※ The list of decisions related to disciplinary severity (insulting a complainant while on sick leave) can be viewed together in the “List of Decisions Related to Disciplinary Severity (Insulting a Complainant While on Sick Leave).”
※ Korean version of this case: Korean article
