<Case Brief>

Court

Seoul Administrative Court


Division / Presiding Judge

Administrative Division 6

Presiding Judge: Na Jin-yi


Decision Date

February 1, 2026


Case Number

2024Guhap83469



—

Holding

The court held that a one-month suspension imposed on a police officer for repeated private use of official vehicles over four years, coupled with obstruction of an internal audit, was lawful and proportionate.


—

Key Facts

The plaintiff, Police Officer A, privately used a police-issued official vehicle 180 times between July 2019 and June 2023.

During an internal inspection:

A falsely claimed the vehicle use was related to drug-related investigative work.

A asked a fellow officer to provide matching false statements, constituting audit obstruction.


Additional misconduct included smoking inside a no-smoking office area.

The Seoul Metropolitan Police Agency initially imposed:

Two-month suspension, and

A disciplinary surcharge (three times the calculated benefit).


On internal appeal, the suspension was reduced to one month, but A challenged even the reduced penalty in court.



—

Court’s Reasoning

Minor procedural flaws do not nullify discipline
Even if parts of the inspection process were imperfect, they did not meaningfully impair the officer’s right to defense and were insufficient to invalidate the disciplinary action.

Private use clearly established
The number of violations was reliably identified by:

Vehicle access logs showing entry into the officer’s residential parking facility, and

Consistent testimony from team members stating the officer rarely conducted legitimate fieldwork.


Audit obstruction is a serious aggravating factor
Soliciting false testimony from colleagues to conceal misconduct constituted interference with disciplinary oversight, independently justifying serious sanctions.

Leadership role heightened responsibility
As a team leader, A occupied a position of influence and trust, making repeated misconduct more serious.

Proportionality upheld
The public interest in maintaining discipline, integrity, and public trust in law enforcement outweighed the personal disadvantage caused by a one-month suspension.



—

Disposition

Plaintiff’s claim dismissed in full

One-month suspension affirmed as lawful



—

Why This Case Matters

Clarifies standards for police discipline
Long-term, repetitive misuse of public resources will not be treated as a minor infraction.

Signals zero tolerance for cover-ups
Attempting to obstruct internal audits can significantly worsen disciplinary outcomes.

Reinforces integrity obligations of public officials
Duties of sincerity and dignity are not abstract principles but enforceable legal standards.

Useful benchmark case
This ruling provides a concrete reference for proportionality analysis in future public-service disciplinary litigation.



—

Takeaway

> Misusing public resources is bad. Misusing them repeatedly—and trying to hide it—is worse. Courts will not step in to soften discipline when integrity itself is at stake.

Article: https://www.lawtimes.co.kr/Case-curation/215477