National Election Commission ahead of National Assembly report on 'infringement of citizens' suffrage' [Gwacheon=Yonhap News]

A court has overturned the disciplinary action of a reprimand issued to a National Election Commission (NEC) employee after corruption in the recruitment process was uncovered by an audit from the Board of Audit and Inspection (BAI).

The court's decision was based on the fact that despite the NEC filing a dispute of authority with the Constitutional Court—arguing that as an independent constitutional institution, it was not subject to BAI audits—and winning that case, it proceeded to discipline the employee based solely on the BAI’s audit results without conducting its own internal investigation.

According to legal circles on the 22nd, the Seoul Administrative Court’s Administrative Division 3 (Presiding Judge Ho Seong-ho) ruled in favor of the plaintiff on the 22nd of last month in a lawsuit filed by NEC employee 'A' against the Secretary-General of the National Election Commission to cancel the reprimand.

Following media reports regarding suspected preferential hiring of children of high-ranking NEC officials, the BAI notified the NEC of the start of an investigation and began an audit in September 2023.

On February 25 of last year, the final audit results revealed that in 2021, 'A' had illegally hired two applicants who did not meet the eligibility requirements for a competitive hiring process by applying regulations that differed from the original recruitment notice.

The BAI subsequently demanded that the NEC take disciplinary action at a level of a light penalty or higher against 'A'.

In response, the NEC deliberated on 'A's discipline in March of that same year and issued a reprimand in April.

However, 'A' filed an administrative lawsuit, arguing, "The disciplinary decision was made in March 2025, which is past the three-year statute of limitations for the incident that occurred in October 2021."

Under the State Public Officials Act, the statute of limitations for disciplinary action against public officials is generally three years, excluding cases such as sexual violence. However, the statute of limitations is suspended when the BAI issues a notice of investigation commencement.

The court determined that in this case, the BAI's audit itself was unlawful; therefore, the notice of investigation commencement could not be considered a valid ground for suspending the statute of limitations.

The court cited the fact that the NEC had filed a dispute of authority with the Constitutional Court challenging the BAI audit, and that on February 27 last year—two days after the BAI's final announcement—the Constitutional Court ruled in favor of the NEC.

At the time, the Constitutional Court held that "the NEC has the authority to independently perform tasks such as election administration and personnel management without improper interference from external agencies like the executive branch," and added that "the BAI cannot be seen as having the authority to conduct performance audits on the NEC."

Based on this, the court pointed out that "the Constitutional Court clarified that the authority to conduct performance audits on the NEC is not recognized at all."

The court further stated, "This audit cannot be viewed as one based on legitimate authority granted by the Constitution and law, and therefore the notice of commencement of the investigation cannot be seen as having the effect of suspending the disciplinary process."

Consequently, the court concluded that the three-year statute of limitations for disciplining 'A' had already expired.

The court explained, "The NEC originally planned to conduct its own special audit regarding allegations of corruption such as preferential hiring, but after deciding to accept the BAI audit, it did not proceed with a separate investigation or disciplinary procedure," adding that "no disciplinary procedures were conducted against 'A' until the BAI's final audit results and disciplinary demands were announced on February 25, 2025."

The court also rejected the NEC's argument that there was a 'legal obstacle' on the grounds that it was uncertain whether the audit fell under the BAI's performance audit authority until the Constitutional Court's decision.

The court emphasized, "The BAI's notice of investigation commencement did not have the effect of prohibiting the NEC's internal disciplinary actions, so it cannot be viewed as a legal obstacle."

It continued, "While it may have been practically difficult for the NEC to proceed with its own internal disciplinary procedures against 'A' after announcing it would accept the BAI audit in 2023, this does not constitute a justifiable reason to override the three-year statute of limitations established to guarantee the stability of a public official's duty and status."

The NEC has appealed the ruling, and the case is currently pending in the Seoul High Court.