A police officer from the Busan Metropolitan Police Agency lost a lawsuit against suspension for leaving without notice while on duty at night and receiving illegal allowances.

It was found that Mr. A, a team leader at the Busan Police Agency, left his workplace without justifiable reasons on 39 occasions, including going out for reasons such as dinner while on duty at night and returning to the office around 7 to 9 a.m. the next day.

The total number of hours not worked was 486 hours, and an allowance of 7.4 million won for that time was also illegally received.

The Busan Police Agency confirmed the wrongdoing by comparing fingerprint recognition access records at the police station, vehicle access records, closed-circuit (CC) TV footage, and vehicle access records at the officetel where Mr. A lives.

Mr. A was demoted in February of last year, but after an appeal review, his suspension was reduced to three months in July of the same year.

The appeal review committee acknowledged all reasons for disciplinary action, but also considered the work performance of Mr. A's team and the 28 awards he received, including a presidential commendation.

In his lawsuit, Mr. A claimed that he spent some of his time approving investigative documents or conducting undercover investigations, and that the actual time he was not working should be considered 28 times, or 344 hours.

However, the court ruled that it was difficult to acknowledge that he actually worked based on payment records alone.

The claim that there was an undercover investigation was also not accepted because the date of the submitted data was incorrect or the time was not specified.

Mr. A claimed that it was also illegal to secure records of residential vehicle access without consent during the inspection process.

However, the court ruled that even if the records are excluded, the grounds for disciplinary action can be acknowledged through other evidence, and even if there are procedural flaws in the process of securing the records, the disciplinary action does not immediately become illegal.

The court said, “There is a high possibility of criticism as there is a high risk of undermining the public’s trust and the work discipline of the police organization,” and added, “The degree of violation of duty is not light for the team leader, who is responsible for guiding and checking the service of team members, repeatedly leaving the night duty station.”