Background

The vice principal (D) of a private school sent an official inquiry to investigative authorities asking whether a teacher (C) was under investigation, indictment, or trial.

This was done without the teacher’s consent.

Upon learning this, the teacher filed a complaint with the Seoul Metropolitan Office of Education’s public interest report center.

As a result, the school foundation received an institutional warning, and the chairman (B) received a personal warning.

—

Lower Court Decisions

Both the 1st and 2nd instance courts ruled in favor of the school, saying:

It was hard to clearly consider the act a disciplinary offense under the Private School Act.

As non-lawyers, the school officials could not have easily recognized the conduct as a disciplinary breach.

Therefore, their failure to request disciplinary proceedings did not amount to a breach of the duty of care.

—

Supreme Court’s Ruling (Case No. 2025Du30721)

The Supreme Court’s Special Division 1 (Justice Shin Sook-Hee presiding) overturned the lower court’s ruling and remanded the case to the Seoul High Court.

The Court stated:

It was premature to conclude that the vice principal’s conduct was a mere administrative mistake.

The school should have verified the vice principal’s claim that the inquiry was done “under standard procedure” by checking similar disciplinary cases.

Because the school failed to do so, the Court found it negligent in exercising the duty of care required of a good administrator.

Article: https://www.lawtimes.co.kr/Case-curation/212250