The decision to suspend a judge for three months after he was found to have illegally paid for sex is fanning criticism against the judiciary.
According to local reports, the judge in question -- a 43-year old who holds a post in an Ulsan court -- was found to have worked at his regular job for a month before he was suspended by the Supreme Court.
He was summarily indicted for the crime of paying money for sexual intercourse in Seoul in June of last year, but South Korea's highest court waited over a month before suspending him for three months. He was ultimately sentenced by Seoul Central District Court to pay a fine of 3 million won ($2,280).
South Korean law stipulates up to one year in prison or 3 million won in fines to those found guilty of soliciting prostitution or those who purchase such illegal services.
Unlike government employees, who can be expelled for a fine of 1 million won, it is nearly impossible for a judge to be fired from his or her job without committing a severe crime. The State Public Officials Act specifies conditions for which a person can be removed from the office, but the act on punishing judges states that they can be punished by reprimand, suspension or wage cut.
Article 46, Clause 1 of the Court Organization Act states that a judge should not be removed from office unless impeached by the National Assembly or having received criminal punishment equal to or higher than imprisonment without physical labor. Neither can a judge be demoted, as there is no recognized ranking among them.
This means that a judicator can get away with crimes that would get most civil workers or regular company employees fired.
There have been other cases where a judge got what was perceived as a slap on the wrist for crimes. Last month, a judge of a Cheongju District Court was accused of multiple cases of sexual harassment on subordinates, for which his wages were cut for four months.
In September last month, Rep. Park Yong-jin of the main opposition Democratic Party of Korea proposed a revision to the act on punishing judges, adding dismissal from duties to the list of possible punishments for judges. The revision is still pending at the National Assembly.
Citing data that he received from the Constitutional Court, Park pointed out that not one judge of the Constitutional Court had received official punishment in the past 10 years, receiving only warnings instead.
