The Day After Signing a Confidentiality Pledge, Permanent Conductor Shared Real Name, Fine and Reprimand... Jeju Audit Committee Seeks Disciplinary Action

【Financial News, Jeju — Reporter Jeong Yong-bok】 A permanent conductor of a provincial arts troupe in Jeju was found to have disclosed the disciplinary subject’s name, accident details, fine and reprimand just one day after serving on a disciplinary committee and signing a confidentiality pledge. The Jeju Audit Committee requested disciplinary action against the conductor, saying that even appointed members who are not public officials must protect official secrets while participating in public deliberations that affect an individual’s status.
According to the Jeju Audit Committee on the 23rd, Seogwipo City held a disciplinary committee meeting on Nov. 5 last year to deliberate on a violation of the duty to maintain dignity related to a traffic accident involving C, a permanent member of the Jeju Provincial Arts Troupe.
A, the permanent conductor, was appointed to the disciplinary committee and attended the meeting. A also signed a pledge not to disclose the disciplinary subject’s personal information or disciplinary-related details learned during the deliberations.
The problem arose the following day. After rehearsal ended on Nov. 6, A met for about 15 minutes with the troupe’s general affairs officer and the union chair of the wind ensemble in a waiting room at the Civic Culture and Sports Complex Center’s performance hall.
The audit found that A first disclosed that the disciplinary committee had met the previous day and referred to the disciplinary subject as "a certain person." After the union chair said that they knew about the matter, A shared the subject’s name, accident details, fine sentence and the reprimand decided by the disciplinary committee.
A also explained details from the deliberations. The investigation found that A said, in substance, that the Audit Committee’s request for disciplinary action was not a final decision and could change depending on the disciplinary committee’s resolution. A also mentioned the possibility of mitigation through deferred discipline and expressed regret that the disciplinary subject had not attended in person to actively explain their position.
A also mentioned the disciplinary subject’s name while explaining that, if a similar incident occurred in the future, members would be guided to attend disciplinary committee proceedings in person and provide a sufficient explanation.
The union chair, after hearing A’s explanation, contacted another disciplinary committee member to verify whether the information about deferred discipline was accurate. That member reported the breach of the confidentiality pledge to Seogwipo City on Nov. 12 last year.
After confirming the facts with the parties involved and related individuals, Seogwipo City requested an investigation by the Audit Committee on Dec. 17 of the same year.
The Audit Committee determined that the disciplinary subject’s name, disciplinary information, the possibility of mitigation, and whether the subject had attended and offered an explanation were all confidential information learned in the course of A’s duties. It also concluded that the general affairs officer and union chair who took part in the meeting were not authorized, nor did they have a work-related need, to receive such information.

Disciplinary committee meetings and comments made by committee members are also confidential in principle. The Disciplinary and Appeals Regulations for Local Public Officials stipulate that anyone who attends a disciplinary-related meeting must not disclose secrets learned in the course of duty.
The Audit Committee concluded that appointed members who are not public officials are not exempt. The disciplinary committee of the Jeju Provincial Arts Troupe may include an artistic director, choreographer, conductor and outside experts. Because disciplinary results directly affect the subject’s status, the committee determined that civilian appointees also hold a position that performs a public deliberative function while carrying out their duties.
Seogwipo City offered a different view. It said A appeared to have disclosed some relevant details not to defame the disciplinary subject but to manage the conduct of troupe members and prevent similar cases. Although the city acknowledged that mentioning the subject’s name violated the confidentiality pledge, it also argued that the matter was not serious enough to warrant disciplinary or other status-related action.
The Audit Committee rejected that view. It said a breach of the duty of confidentiality must be judged not by whether there was an intent to defame someone, but by whether confidential information learned through official duties at a disciplinary committee meeting was passed to an unauthorized person. The committee also determined that personnel management and the prevention of similar incidents could have been achieved without disclosing the subject’s name and specific deliberation details.
A also admitted passing on the information but argued that there was no intention to cause harm. The Audit Committee said this circumstance could be considered when determining the level of discipline, but it could not justify the disclosure itself.
The Audit Committee noted that A knowingly passed on information from confidential disciplinary deliberations. The union chair actually contacted another disciplinary committee member to recheck the facts, raising concerns that the confidentiality and independence of the committee’s proceedings, as well as the fairness and credibility of future procedures, could be undermined.
The Audit Committee therefore concluded that A’s conduct constituted grounds for discipline under the duty not to disclose confidential information set out in the Disciplinary and Appeals Regulations for Local Public Officials and the Regulations on the Operation of the Jeju Provincial Arts Troupe. It requested that the Mayor of Seogwipo take disciplinary action.
Under the Regulations on the Operation of the Jeju Provincial Arts Troupe, disciplinary measures for members are divided into reprimand, pay reduction, suspension from performances and dismissal from the troupe. The Audit Committee did not specify the exact level of discipline in its request.
The audit findings also offer implications for information management by various committees operated by local governments. The case reaffirmed the principle that anyone who participates in deliberations affecting an individual’s rights and status must protect confidential information obtained during the proceedings, regardless of whether they are a public official or a civilian appointee.
[email protected] Jeong Yong-bok Reporter