High-ranking NIS official disciplined for 'personnel solicitation'... Court says 'insufficient evidence'

[Financial News] A high-ranking official of the National Intelligence Service who was disciplined with a pay cut for allegedly making negative personnel solicitations won a lawsuit against the NIS.
According to the legal community on the 17th, the 14th Division of the Seoul Administrative Court (Presiding Judge Lee Sang-deok) ruled in favor of the plaintiff in a lawsuit filed by NIS employee A against the NIS on June 5 to cancel the disciplinary action.
Mr. A was commissioned during the National Security Planning Agency era in 1991 and was promoted to a specific grade 3 in 2021. In 2023, he was disciplined with a three-month pay cut for allegedly making personnel solicitations to former NIS Director B using political and corporate connections.
The NIS cited two reasons for the discipline. First, Mr. A was suspected of making personnel solicitations through former city councilor C, who was known to be close to the then NIS Director B. It was alleged that Mr. A indirectly hinted to C, ahead of regular personnel appointments, to assist in his promotion, and that C continued to send messages to B, which the NIS believed Mr. A was aware of. The NIS used a lie detector on Mr. A, which showed a 'false' response, as part of their reasoning.
The NIS also believed that Mr. A solicited personnel through former corporate vice president D for a junior colleague. During the promotion process in January 2021, D, who was dining with someone well-acquainted with B, offered to mention Mr. A, but Mr. A declined and instead recommended a junior colleague of a specific grade 4. Mr. A filed a lawsuit against the disciplinary action.
The court sided with Mr. A, stating that there was no concrete evidence or procedure to support the disciplinary reasons. The court found that the evidence presented by the NIS was insufficient to prove the 'high probability' of Mr. A's personnel solicitation.
The court explained, "The NIS merely pointed out that Mr. A, B, and C had an 'implicit' personnel solicitation relationship based on a document prepared by the NIS Director's secretary, without specifying the exact time or content of the misconduct." It added, "Mr. A's claim that he rejected D's solicitation offer and merely mentioned a junior could be a polite refusal of an improper solicitation or simply a vague request to take care of a junior."
The court further stated, "It is difficult to see the disciplinary action in this case as valid, as it was based solely on insufficient and fragmentary grounds to conclude that there was a serious misconduct of improper personnel solicitation prohibited by the Anti-Solicitation Act." 

kyu0705@fnnews.com Kim Dong-kyu Reporter