Workplace Harassment in Korea, Part 3: Protecting the Person

When a workplace harassment complaint comes in, a company's attention naturally focuses toward "who did what" — identifying the parties, taking statements, establishing the facts. What should not be missed during the process is the duty to protect the affected employee, even before harassment has been formally established.

This is the Part 3 of our workplace harassment series, focusing on that protection duty.

The Legal Basis: "During the Investigation" and "After Confirmation" Are Different Stages

Article 76-3 of the Labor Standards Act splits victim protection into two distinct phases:

• Paragraph 3 (during the investigation): While an investigation is ongoing, the employer must take appropriate measures — such as reassigning the work location or ordering paid leave — where necessary to protect the employee who suffered harm or claims to have suffered harm ("the affected employee"). Critically, such measures cannot be taken against the affected employee's wishes.
• Paragraph 4 (after findings are confirmed): Once harassment is confirmed, the employer must take measures such as work location reassignment, department transfer, or paid leave — but only if the affected employee requests it.

Paragraph 3 is a provisional, precautionary protection that applies before any conclusion has been reached. Paragraph 4 is a definitive measure triggered by the employee's request once the facts are settled.

The penalties for getting this wrong are substantial. Failing to implement post-confirmation measures triggers administrative fines under Article 116. Taking dismissal or other disadvantageous action against the reporting or affected employee carries criminal liability — up to three years' imprisonment or a fine of up to KRW 30 million (Article 76-3, Paragraph 6, in conjunction with Article 109). This is the only provision in the entire workplace harassment framework backed by criminal punishment, which signals how seriously the law treats retaliation.

"Separation" Is Not Automatically the Right Answer

A common misconception in practice is equating victim protection with physically separating the victim from the alleged perpetrator. The type and duration of measures should be determined by weighing the affected employee's specific request against workplace circumstances, with the overarching goal being genuine protection and prevention of recurrence.

The real linchpin here is the employee's wishes. As the latter half of Article 76-3, Paragraph 3 makes clear, measures taken during the investigation period cannot go against the affected employee's wishes. As a matter of practice, companies should confirm the employee's views before implementing any measure and document it in writing.

Confidentiality: The Last Line of Defense Against Secondary Harm

Article 76-3, Paragraph 7 imposes a confidentiality obligation on everyone involved in the process — the investigator, anyone who received a report on the investigation's contents, and any other participant. This is very important as any leak of information that could identify the victim constitutes secondary harm in itself.

The Ministry's 2026 revision to its complaint-handling guidelines reinforces this direction. Employers are now expected to document the date the complaint was received, when the investigation started, the reasons for selecting investigators and witnesses, the victim protection measures taken, the statement-taking process, and more — because labor authorities may scrutinize not just the employer's conclusion, but whether the process itself was objective, whether the complainant and key witnesses had a genuine opportunity to be heard, and whether the accused was properly excluded from the decision-making. Careful documentation of the investigation process is, in effect, the company's own protection.

Practical Checklist

• [ ] Have you avoided unilaterally changing the affected employee's work location or duties immediately upon receiving a complaint, without first confirming their wishes?
• [ ] Before implementing any protective measure during the investigation (reassignment, paid leave, etc.), have you consulted the affected employee and documented their input?
• [ ] Has every investigator signed a confidentiality pledge?
• [ ] Has the affected employee been notified in writing of the investigator's identity and confidentiality obligations?
• [ ] Is the company prepared to implement Paragraph 4 measures upon the employee's request immediately after findings are confirmed, without a gap in protection?
• [ ] Are you documenting the complaint receipt date, investigation start/completion dates, and all protective measures taken?

Series Note

This Part 3 covered victim protection measures during the investigation stage. It follows Part 1 (the legal definition and elements of workplace harassment) and Part 2 (the employer's investigation duty).

---

This content is provided for general informational purposes and does not constitute legal advice for any specific matter. Please consult a qualified professional regarding your particular circumstances.

© 2026 SJ Chun. All rights reserved. This article may not be reproduced, copied, or republished, in whole or in part, without prior written permission from the author.

For inquiries, please contact sjchun@seoulcounsel.com.