Rapport intérimaire - Rapport No. 320, Mars 2000

1. 456. The Committee already examined the substance of this case at its May 1996, March and June 1997, March and November 1998 meetings, when it presented an interim report to the Governing Body (304th Report, paras. 221-254; 306th Report, paras. 295-346; 307th Report, paras. 177-236; 309th Report, paras. 120-160; 311th Report, paras. 293-339, approved by the Governing Body at its 266th, 268th, 269th, 271st and 273rd Sessions (June 1996, March and June 1997, March and November 1998)).
2. 457. The Committee had noted at its May 1999 meeting that an advisory mission on freedom of association was carried out in the Republic of Korea in April 1999 whose mandate was to examine, following the February 1998 high-level tripartite mission, the problems in implementing the Committee's recommendations. The Committee had requested the Government to furnish its observations on pending allegations so as to enable it to examine the case at its next meeting (316th Report, para. 12).
3. 458. The Korean Metal Workers' Federation (KMWF) presented a complaint in communications dated 10 December 1998 and 22 January 1999.
4. 459. The Government furnished its observations in communications dated 22 October, 23 November 1999 and 9 March 2000.
5. 460. The Republic of Korea has not ratified the Freedom of Association and Protection of the Right to Organise Convention, 1948 (No. 87), or the Right to Organise and Collective Bargaining Convention, 1949 (No. 98).

A. Previous examination of the case

1. 461. During its previous examination of this case, the Committee had noted that the case addressed allegations both of a legislative and factual nature. With regard to the allegations of a legislative nature, the Committee recalled that a Tripartite Commission composed of representatives of the Government, business and the two central trade union organizations, as well as of Members of Parliament belonging to other political parties, had been established in June 1998 to deal with a series of reforms on labour-related issues, including those relating to freedom of association. The Committee had further recalled that the issues of a legislative nature related to the legalization of teachers' unions, the right to organize of public servants, trade union pluralism at the enterprise level, the lifting of the ban on third-party intervention in collective bargaining and industrial disputes, the right to strike in non-essential public services, industrial action in the form of workplace occupations, the payment of wages to full-time union officials, the denial of dismissed and unemployed workers to keep their union membership, the ineligibility of non-members of trade unions to stand for office and the lack of legal status of the KCTU. The Committee had expressed the firm hope that these issues would be resolved as soon as possible within the framework of the Tripartite Commission in a manner that would ensure full compliance with the Committee's previous recommendations.
2. 462. Regarding the allegations of a factual nature, the Committee had urged the Government to take the appropriate measures so that the persons detained or on trial or for whom arrest warrants had been issued as a result of their trade union activities were released or the charges brought against them dropped or the arrest warrants withdrawn. Finally, the Committee had urged the Government to take the necessary measures to ensure that two public servants, who were dismissed for exercising activities linked to their right to organize, were reinstated in their jobs.
3. 463. At its November 1998 session, in the light of the Committee's interim conclusions, the Governing Body approved the following recommendations:
4. (...)
5. (i) to take the appropriate steps so as to ensure that the right to organize of teachers, as enunciated in the tripartite agreement, is recognized as soon as possible and at the very latest within the time frame mentioned in that agreement;
6. (ii) to register the Korean Teachers' and Educational Workers' Union (CHUNKYOJO) so that it can legally defend and promote the interests of its members as soon as the right to organize of teachers is legalized;
7. (iii) to consider extending the right of association, recognized as of 1 January 1999, for certain categories of public servants, to all those categories of public servants who should enjoy this right in accordance with freedom of association principles;
8. (iv) to take steps to recognize, as soon as possible, the right to establish and join trade union organizations for the abovementioned public servants;
9. (v) to speed up the process of legalizing trade union pluralism at the enterprise level and to this end promote the implementation of a stable collective bargaining system. The Committee suggests that this is a matter that should be discussed in the Tripartite Commission;
10. (vi) to repeal the requirement, contained in section 40 of the TULRAA, to notify to the Ministry of Labour the identity of third parties in collective bargaining and industrial disputes as well as the penalties contained in section 89(1) of the TULRAA for violation of the prohibition on persons not notified to the Ministry of Labour from intervening in collective bargaining or industrial disputes;
11. (vii) to amend the list of essential public services contained in section 71 of the Trade Union and Labour Relations Adjustment Act (TULRAA) so that the right to strike is prohibited only in essential services in the strict sense of the term;
12. (viii) to provide information on the application in practice of section 42(1) of the TULRAA relating to the prohibition of workplace occupations;
13. (ix) considering that the prohibition of the payment of full-time union officials by employers is a matter which should not be the subject of legislative interference, to repeal section 24(2) of the TULRAA;
14. (x) to repeal the provisions concerning the denial of the right of dismissed and unemployed workers to keep their union membership and the ineligibility of non-members of trade unions to stand for office (sections 2(4)(d) and 23(1) of the TULRAA);
15. (xi) to take the appropriate steps so that the Korean Confederation of Trade Unions (KCTU) is registered as a trade union organization as soon as possible and in the interim to ensure that it is invited to participate in the work of the tripartite review or consultative committees on labour matters and entitled to participate in union assistance programmes from which it is currently excluded and to provide concrete information thereon;
16. (xii) to keep the Committee informed of the outcome of the deliberations within the second Tripartite Commission on the above issues, which the Committee firmly hopes will be resolved as soon as possible in a manner that will ensure full compliance with the Committee's recommendations;
17. (xiii) to provide information on measures taken to give effect to the above recommendations and to keep the Committee informed thereon.
18. (b) As regards the allegations of a factual nature, the Committee firmly insists that the Government do everything in its power to ensure the dropping of all remaining charges pending against Mr. Kwon Young-kil, former President of the KCTU.
19. (c) As regards the KCTU's new allegations contained in communications dated 18 August and 9 September 1998, respectively:
20. (i) the Committee requests the Government to provide information on the agreement reached between the KCTU and government representatives on 5 June 1998 in which the Government allegedly committed itself to withdraw all charges against KCTU leaders either arrested or wanted for arrest for the May Day rally;
21. (ii) the Committee urges the Government to take the appropriate measures so that the persons detained or on trial or for whom arrest warrants have been issued (see Appendix 2) as a result of their trade union activities are released or that the charges brought against them are dropped or that the arrest warrants are withdrawn. In the case of persons charged with violence or assault, the Committee asks the Government to ensure that these charges are dealt with as soon as possible. It requests the Government to provide information concerning measures taken on all these points;
22. (iii) the Committee urges the Government to take the necessary measures to ensure that the two public servants, Lee Seung-chan and Kim Dong-il, are immediately reinstated in their jobs. It requests the Government to keep it informed of progress made in this regard.
23. B. The Government's reply
24. Developments concerning the Tripartite Commission (311th Report, paragraph 339(a)(xii))
25. 464. In its communication dated 22 October 1999, the Government describes in a general manner certain developments regarding the Tripartite Commission in the Republic of Korea. A first Tripartite Commission, formed on 15 January 1998, concluded the 90-point tripartite agreement entitled "Social accord on overcoming economic crisis", declaring the strong commitment of social partners to resuscitating the national economy. Based on the aforementioned agreement, the second Tripartite Commission was established on 3 June 1998, along with the efforts made to provide a legal framework for the tripartite consultative body. The second Commission reviewed the progress in implementing the agreed-upon points of the first Commission. However, the Korean Confederation of Trade Unions (KCTU) withdrew from the Commission on 24 February 1999, arguing that the Commission was a mere advisory body to the President and that the tripartite agreements had not been implemented as agreed upon. The Federation of Korean Trade Unions (FKTU) also declared its conditional withdrawal from the Commission on 9 April 1999 until such time as a special law concerning the Commission was enacted and a third Commission of a stronger status was established. It demanded that the restructuring drive lacking labour involvement be stopped, that the legal provision banning wage payments to full-time unionists be removed, that unions be allowed to participate in business management, that the tripartite agreements be thoroughly implemented; and that the legal status of the Commission be strengthened. In addition, the Korea Employers' Federation (KEF) walked out of the Commission on 16 April 1999, arguing that the Government had been unreasonably favourable to labour. The departure of labour and management from the second Commission disabled the normal operations of the Commission.
26. 465. The Government points out that it has been committed to implementing the tripartite agreements, while trying to convince both labour and management to recognize that their participation in the Commission is of mutual benefit. In this regard, the Government indicates that it enacted the Law for the Establishment and Management of the Tripartite Commission on 24 May 1999 in order to reinforce the role which the Commission has to play as a social partners' policy consultative body. As a result of this effort, the third Tripartite Commission was launched in September 1999. This Commission is comprised of the FKTU, KEF, the Government and public interest members. The Commission has so far called two plenary meetings, as of 7 October 1999, and the next meeting is expected to determine the agenda for discussion at the third Tripartite Commission. The Government anticipates that the third Commission will have in-depth and thorough discussions on issues about which labour and management have conflicting interests.
27. 466. In its communication dated 9 March 2000, the Government indicates that the third Tripartite Commission has completed the organization of its committees and subcommittees. The Subcommittee on Industrial Relations has eight main items on its agenda (including wage payments to full-time union officials by employers, adjustment in the scope of essential public services, discussion of trade union and bargaining structures and unification of bargaining channels for multiple enterprise-level unions). This Subcommittee also has five priority tasks (including the encouragement of the implementation of collective agreements, revision of the law allowing dismissed workers to join trade unions at the industry or regional level, securing the measures to deal with the delays in revising the Law on Political Funds which would allow trade unions to donate political funds, as agreed in the early stage of the Tripartite Commission). Following the FKTU's withdrawal from the Tripartite Commission on 15 November 1999, the Tripartite Commission held public discussions with the participation by public interest members on the payment of full-time union officials by employers as well as a single collective bargaining channel. Based on these discussions, the Government submitted respective bills to the National Assembly on 2 December 1999.
28. Right to organize of teachers and registration of the Korean Teachers' and Educational Workers' Union (CHUNKYOJO) (311th Report, paragraph 339(a)(i) and (ii))
29. 467. The Government states that the first Tripartite Commission agreed, on 26 February 1999, to "allow teachers to organize their unions beginning 1 July 1999", as part of the tripartite agreement. The second Commission agreed, on 31 October 1998, on substantive ways to secure basic labour rights for teachers, without any prejudice to international labour standards and students' right to education. The Government, based on the tripartite agreement, devised a draft entitled "The Act Concerning Establishment and Operation of Teachers' Unions", and submitted it to the National Assembly for approval on 1 December 1998. On 6 January 1999, the National Assembly passed the draft Bill which took effect on 1 July 1999. The Government explains that the CHUNKYOJO and the Korean Union of Teaching and Educational Workers (KUTE), another teachers' union affiliated to the FKTU - to which certificates of registration were issued on 2 July 1999 - are now in place.
30. Right to organize of public servants (311th Report, paragraph 339(a)(iii) and (iv))
31. 468. The Government recalls that the first Tripartite Commission agreed to recognize the right of public servants to organize in two phases: (1) recognition of workplace associations for public servants, a precursor of the recognition of unions of public servants; and (2) recognition of unions for public servants following public consultations and revision of relevant legislation. The first phase is already in force. Certain categories of public servants are ineligible for membership of workplace associations (such as teachers who already have the right to organize, police officers and firefighters). Moreover, membership is excluded for 45,000 management-level officials and for about 147,000 officials in charge of personnel, budget and confidential documents. Therefore, 338,000 public servants from a total of 930,000 are eligible to join workplace associations. The reasons for excluding certain public servants from membership are as follows: supervisory officials can represent the position of employers; and the participation of workers in charge of the personnel, budget and confidential documents may hamper the efficiency of business as well as the independence of the workplace associations. These workplace associations have been established at 84 offices (eight central administration offices, 35 auxiliary organs and 41 local governments). Their number is expected to increase rapidly. The Government will seriously review expansion in the scope of public servants eligible to join workplace associations and will recognize trade unions for them after reviewing the experiences of the workplace associations and public opinion.
32. Legalization of trade union pluralism at the enterprise level (311th Report, paragraph 339(a)(v))
33. 469. The Government recalls that trade union pluralism at the enterprise level is prohibited until 31 December 2001 to prevent excessive competition between trade unions and to give enough time to unify collective bargaining channels. The Government has prepared a draft bill based on the public interests representatives' suggestions within the Tripartite Commission and submitted it to the National Assembly on 29 December 1999. The bill provides that, when a workplace has multiple trade unions, the unions are allowed to ask for bargaining through voluntarily unified collective bargaining channels. If voluntary unification is not reached, the right to represent workers will be given to a union comprising more than half of the unionized workers. If no union satisfies the above conditions, trade unions are allowed to ask for bargaining through unified collective bargaining channels established by presidential decree.
34. The notification of the identity of third parties in collective bargaining and industrial disputes (311th Report, paragraph 339(a)(vi))
35. 470. The Government recalls that the prohibition on third-party intervention was lifted in March 1997. The requirement to notify the identity of third parties is destined to prevent unjust and unwanted interference by third parties and to guarantee voluntary problem-solving by trade unions and employers. Notification does not refer to inspection, approval or permission but only the act of providing information. Therefore, management and labour are free to choose third parties at their discretion. The applicable sanctions in case of failure to notify are not intended to punish those parties who offer advice in good faith but those who are engaged in acts of instigation, disruption and control. Workers' and employers' organizations have raised no objections to these sanctions which have not been applied. The Government will nevertheless review the penal provision through discussion at the Tripartite Commission.
36. The scope of essential services (311th Report, paragraph 339(a)(vii))
37. 471. The Government states that urban bus transportation and banking (except the Bank of Korea) will be classified as non-essential public services from 2001. As for the oil refinery and supply sector, the Government stresses its important to the economy. The Government will nevertheless review measures to narrow the scope of essential public services following the results of Tripartite Commission discussions. The Government recalls further that restrictions on the right to strike are not always automatically applied to essential public services. Additionally, there are certain cases of legal strikes in these services.
38. Information on the application in practice of section 42(1) of the TULRAA relating to the prohibition of workplace occupations (311th Report, paragraph 339(a)(viii))
39. 472. The Government indicates that the legal provision that prohibits occupation of production facilities (or other major activities) does not ban simple workplace occupations, but instead concerns obstruction of work by other employees. Therefore, the provision does not ban temporary or partial occupations which do not cause any disturbance to other employees who choose to keep working. The Government adds that there have been no penal sanctions imposed under the provision (article 42(1) of the TULRAA) since 1 January 1998.
40. Prohibition of the payment of wages to full-time union officials (311th Report, paragraph 339(a)(ix))
41. 473. The Government indicated that, on 15 November 1999, the FKTU withdrew from the Tripartite Commission demanding early resolution of the issue. The Government has continued consultations with employers' and workers' organizations to resolve this problem. The Tripartite Commission presented suggestions made by public interest representatives on 15 November 1999 and, on this basis, the Government submitted draft legislation to the National Assembly on 29 December 1999.
42. Denial of dismissed and unemployed workers to keep their union membership and the ineligibility of non-members of trade unions to stand for office (311th Report, paragraph 339(a)(x))
43. 474. After the Tripartite Commission agreed to recognize the right of dismissed workers to keep their union membership in trade unions at the industry-wide or regional level, the Government proposed legislation to this effect. However, the legislative process is currently on hold due to legal considerations such as the period of time during which membership is recognized. The issue of dismissed trade union officials maintaining union membership will be examined by the third Tripartite Commission.
44. Information on the agreement reached between the KCTU and the Government representatives on 5 June 1998 in which the Government allegedly committed itself to withdraw all charges against KCTU leaders either arrested or wanted for arrest for the May Day rally (311th Report, paragraph 339(c)(i))
45. 475. The Government acknowledges that the KCTU and the Government reached an agreement on 5 June 1998 relating to issues to be discussed and implemented in the second Tripartite Commission. However, this agreement does not contain any commitment by the Government to drop all charges against the KCTU leaders arrested or wanted for arrest. (The Government attaches a copy of this agreement to its reply.)
46. Information on the current situation of persons detained or on trial or wanted for arrest (311th Report, paragraph 339(c)(ii))
47. 476. The Government indicates that out of 70 people the KCTU alleged were detained, on trial or wanted for arrest, only three individuals - that is, Kim Kwang-sik, Kim Myung-ho and Lee Hee - are still detained. Among them, only one person was detained as a result of strike action. Mr. Kim Kwang-sik, Chairman of the Hyundai Motors Trade Union, was sentenced to imprisonment for one and a half years on 13 May 1999 on charges of obstructing the work of public officials and inflicting injuries on them, performing violent acts, violation of the Assembly and Demonstration Act, obstruction of ordinary traffic and obstruction of business. The Government points out that the other two individuals were arrested on charges of violating the National Security Law provision, which bans the establishment of anti-state organizations and the publication and distribution of pro-communist materials. Their arrests have no relation with the KCTU strikes. The Government adds that the Pusan High Court sentenced Kim Myung-ho to three years in prison on 12 May 1999 and Lee Hee to two years in prison on 2 February 1999. Presently both of them are on trial at the Supreme Court. In its communication dated 9 March 2000, the Government states that none of the persons mentioned by the KCTU are detained. Kim Kwang-sik, Kim Myoung-ho and Lee Hee were released on 31 December 1999, 12 January 2000 and 12 May 1999, respectively.
48. Information on the Committee's request to the Government to take necessary measures to ensure that the two public servants, Lee Seung-chan and Kim Dong-il, were reinstated in their jobs (311th Report, paragraph 339(c)(iii))
49. 477. The Government states that Kim Dong-il, a public servant at the Mokpo tax office who was dismissed in June 1998, filed a suit against the Mokpo tax office before the Kwangju District Court regarding the office's decision to dismiss him. On 8 April 1999 the Kwangju District Court ruled, in Kim's favour, that the decision of dismissal be withdrawn. On 28 April 1999 the Head of the Kwangju Regional Office of the National Tax Administration appealed to the Kwangju High Court. On 8 July 1999 the appeals of the Administration were dismissed. On 27 July 1999 the Head of the Kwangju Regional Office of the National Tax Administration withdrew the dismissal and reinstated Kim in his job. The Government adds that Lee Seung-chan, a public servant at the Yongsan-gu office of the Seoul Metropolitan City who was dismissed in August 1998, had his request for review of his appeals on 16 November 1998 dismissed. On 10 March 1999 Lee brought a suit against the Head of the Yongsan-gu office before the Seoul administration court. Since 14 April 1999 seven hearings have been held on this case and Lee is still on trial.
50. Information on the registration of the KCTU (311th Report, paragraph 339(a)(xi))
51. 478. In a communication dated 23 November 1999, the Government indicates that on 22 November the Ministry of Labour formally recognized the KCTU as a legal entity. The Government explains that the KCTU has, since its establishment in November 1995, made five attempts to register as a legal entity. However, the Government had requested that the KCTU correct some of its shortcomings prior to receiving recognition since certain officials and affiliates of the KCTU disqualified it from union status. The Government, with the recent enactment of the Teachers' Labour Union Act, has been searching for ways to fast-track the KCTU's union registration, suggesting ways in which the KCTU could meet the legal criteria. On 12 November 1999, the Ministry of Labour requested the KCTU to provide supplementary information within a 20-day period due to omissions in the names and addresses of all its union officials, which must under law accompany its application. By providing the information on 19 November, the KCTU met all the requirements specified by the law for the issuance of the certificate giving it legal status as a union. The Government plans to expand the KCTU's participation in other committees beyond those in which it already participates.
52. Information on charges pending against the former KCTU President, Kwon Young-kil (311th Report, paragraph 339(b))
53. 479. According to the Government, Mr. Kwon Young-kil was charged with obstruction of traffic, violation of the Labour Dispute Adjustment Act, violation of the Law on the Punishment of Violence and violation of the Law on the Collection of Contributions. Mr. Kwon has been relieved from the charges of violation of the Law on Collection of Contributions ever since this law was declared unconstitutional. Currently, the trial over the remaining three charges is ongoing. The prosecutor responsible for this case considers that the withdrawal of charges would violate the principle of impartiality in the application of the law, impair the dignity of the law and endanger the maintenance of law and order. Therefore, the prosecutor is unable to drop the charges against Mr. Kwon.
54. C. The KMWF's new allegations
55. 480. In a communication dated 10 December 1998, the KMWF asserts that it is filing a complaint for the following reasons: violent police intervention to break peaceful strikes; large-scale arrests of strikers; the detention and imprisonment of key trade union leaders and workers who have gone on strike; laws that allow employers to dismiss workers unfairly and to ignore Central Labour Court rulings for reinstatement.
56. 481. The KMWF proceeds first of all to explain the background to the industrial dispute concerning the Mando Machinery Workers' Union (MMWU). It indicates that the Halla Group, one of the 30 largest conglomerates (chaebol) in the Republic of Korea, owns seven plants that manufacture auto parts and air conditioners. The 4,500 workers in these seven plants are organized into one union, the MMWU. From 6 December 1997, when the Mando Machinery Company went into bankruptcy as a result of mismanagement by the Halla Group, workers were subjected to arbitrary work schedules, wage arrears, elimination of benefits and bonuses, unilateral dismissal and coerced voluntary retirement. The KMWF states that the MMWU attempted to realize a new culture of industrial relations and approached the company for discussion. On 23 February 1998, the MMWU and the company came to a negotiated agreement, the "employment security contract", in which the workers of MMWU made concessions in return for the company's agreement (1) "not to execute a company-forced/artificial workforce reduction", and (2) to include the MMWU in the process of industrial restructuring. However, the company violated this agreement through its 23 July 1998 unilateral announcement to dismiss 1,163 workers in addition to the financially coercive "voluntary retirement" circulated by the company in May, June and September 1998. Article 31 of the Korean Labour Standards Act specifies the provisions guiding the use of lay-off in cases of managerial emergency. One important precondition for the company to fulfil is to have exhausted other alternatives to avoid lay-off, after which the company can retrench. The company failed to look for alternatives to lay-off and furthermore disregarded the alternatives and proposals submitted by the MMWU. The company's refusal to enter into genuine dialogue, and the company's violation of the February 1998 collective agreement, left the MMWU no recourse but to go on strike. In order to achieve a bargaining table with as little harm to the company as possible, the MMWU first organized two-day warning work stoppages of two hours each per production line on 11-13 August 1998. However, the company continued to ignore the union and plough through with their plans for dismissal despite the illegality of the lay-off according to the Labour Standards Act and in violation of the collective agreement of 23 February. Thus, the MMWU was forced to call a strike in all seven factories on 17 August 1998. This grew into a sit-in strike. Sit-ins occurred at all the individual factories of the company until 3 September 1998.
57. 482. The KMWF points out that as the strike began to gain momentum, five MMWU officers were suddenly arrested on 29 August 1998. The arrest warrant for MMWU President Hwang was on grounds of "obstruction of business" while the other four were arrested for resisting the police's violent arrest of Mr. Hwang. Mr. Hwang's "obstruction of business" crime was to have organized a strike. The KMWF stresses that obstruction of business is part of the Penal Code (Penal Code 1: section 314), and is so vaguely written that it can be widely interpreted to conclude that any strike is a criminal "obstruction of business". Mr. Hwang was sentenced to one year in prison and four other union officers were sentenced to ten months' imprisonment. Mr. Hwang remains in prison while the other unionists were released on a "stay of execution", a deferral of the prison sentence. However, in a stay of execution, should the unionists be convicted again, they must serve out the deferred term as well as the new term. Additionally, should they be convicted again - a strong possibility given that "obstruction of business" is widely used to convict unionists who strike - then the chances of receiving another sentence deferral are quite slim if not nil. Thus. it acts as a "good behaviour" deterrent against future strike activity. The KMWF explains that, all in all, the police arrested 2,580 people for the strike. Although many were released within one to ten days, 40 MMWU members and officers were detained under "obstruction of business" charges.
58. 483. The KMWF asserts first of all that using criminal "obstruction of business" laws to imprison or arrest trade unionists for a strike is an abuse incompatible with freedom of association. Secondly, the practice in the Republic of Korea is to use this charge regardless of whether or not business is actually obstructed. The 17 August-3 September 1998 MMWU strike illustrates this well. In the MMWU strike, the MMWU agreed to allow the company's managerial/office staff to work on the production lines as scab labour. MMWU did not occupy any production facilities in their strike. Moreover, each of the seven factories was overloaded with unsold stock. In some factories, the stock was so piled up that there were not enough storage platforms to hold the stock and the excess was sat on the plant floor. Yet the strike was construed and judged as an "obstruction of business". All of the other 40 unionists arrested under this charge who have had their final trial were convicted and sentenced to eight months' to two years' imprisonment but released on "stay of execution" deferral. The KMWF contends that these 40 detentions reveal just how broad section 314 of the Penal Code can be interpreted; indeed, the "obstruction of business" code is only a few lines long, does not contain a definition of what obstruction of business is, yet carries a maximum sentence of five years' imprisonment and/or a 15,000,000 won fine and has been, in 1998, the single most-used tool in imprisoning metalworkers for having embarked on strike action, a normal trade union activity.
59. 484. The KMWF then goes on to protest the government authorization of riot police to break the strike, as well as the ensuing violence. At 6 a.m. on 3 September combined forces of 14,000 riot police simultaneously stormed all seven of the Mando machinery plants to break up the MMWU peaceful sit-in strike. The riot police used unusual violence and injured many strikers in the raid. Included in the riot police arsenal were: motorized tear-gas tanks, also known as "pepper-fog", fork-lift cranes, helicopters armed with a special tear-gas essence that has normally been reserved for use in warfare, water cannons, tear-gas bombs, and steel pipes to thrash the sit-in strikers. As the riot police raided the factories with their arsenal, the strikers attempted to defend their right to strike by making a human barricade to the police attack. At this point the police liberally used tear gas, pepper-fog, the other weapons in their arsenal and went into the human barricade, smashing their truncheons into people, including nursery school children and pregnant women who were sympathizing with the strikers. This is where most of the injury occurred as many received bloody wounds inflicted by the baton and suffered from the chemical effects of the liberal use of tear gas.
60. 485. The KMWF then turns to the case of the Hyundai Motor Workers' Union (HMWU) whose struggle in August 1998 for employment security and against the erosion of section 31 of the Labour Standards Act resulted in the arrest and detention of union leaders and union members who participated in the sit-in and factory occupation strike.
61. 486. The KMWF alleges that arrests began in August, continued through September, October and November of 1998, and the most recent arrest took place on 5 December. The detained Hyundai unionists all have the charge of "obstruction of business" on their arrest warrants. Moreover, some "obstruction of business" charges were compounded with charges of "violence" based on the scuffles that took place when management tried to break the strike. The charges of "violence" were also based on scuffles between unionists and riot police when the riot police performed a "dry run raid" of the factory at dawn on 18 August 1998. At that time 15,000 riot police, armed with 20 motorized tear-gas launchers, 30 pieces of heavy equipment, including fork-lift cranes, fire engines and water cannons, swooped down on the outnumbered sit-in strikers. The KMWF asserts that though the scuffles were provoked by police action, the defence that unionists put up was later used as legal charges for detention and sentencing.
62. 487. Regarding the case of the Sammi Specialty Steel Workers' Union (SSSWU), the KMWF explains that a dispute arose when POSCO (Pohang Iron & Steel Company), a government-invested company, engineered a "purchase of assets" (P&A) of Sammi Specialty Steel. All the factories, equipment and offices of Sammi Steel were sold to POSCO. In cases of P&A, the acquired goods must be used for another business purpose and there is no obligation to have employment succession or trade union succession. In POSCO's case, however, the factories acquired perform exactly the same function as the Sammi Specialty Steel Company and make the same products, effectively a "business transfer", in which the company has an obligation to ensure succession of the union, succession of the collective bargaining agreement and employment succession of the workers. However, POSCO, an anti-union enterprise, deliberatively wrote up the contract as a "purchase of assets" in order to dismiss the most active union members and get rid of the union. In doing so, it succeeded in eliminating 182 of the most active union members including the union officers. After examining the circumstances of the dismissals and the current activities of the acquired Sammi Specialty Steel units, the Regional Labour Commission handed down the decision that POSCO's dismissals of the 182 SSSWU most active members (including the union officers, elected shop stewards and other union activists) were unfair and that the workers must be reinstated. When POSCO appealed the decision to the Central Labour Commission (CLC), the CLC ruled that the dismissed SSSWU members and officers must be reinstated.
63. 488. The KMWF contends that despite the CLC ruling, POSCO has yet to comply. Some KCTU leaders brought the SSSWU case before President Kim Dae Jung on 22 April 1998 who promised to ensure enforcement of the CLC ruling immediately. On 11 May 1998 the National Audit Board also examined the POSCO/Sammi case and ruled that it was a clear case of business transfer and not a P&A. KCTU has also brought the SSSWU issue up in the second Tripartite Commission, resulting in a tripartite commission statement to POSCO demanding guarantee of employment for the dismissed workers. However, no actions have been taken by the Government to ensure compliance with the CLC and National Audit Board rulings nor the Tripartite Commission demand towards reinstatement of the dismissed workers.
64. 489. The KMWF alleges that similar events took place in another company, OMRON Automotive Electronics Korea, Co., Ltd. ("OMRON"), which acquired the Dong-hae Company on 1 April 1998 through P&A. However, much like the SSSWU/POSCO case, the workers produce exactly the same automotive electronic components. According to the KMWF, OMRON has an unstated anti-union policy illustrated by its dismissal of nine Dong-hae union members, including the union officers. The KMWF states that, as in the SSSWU case, the Seoul Regional Labour Relations Commission ruled on 24 June 1998 that the OMRON dismissals were unjust, and that OMRON should consequently reinstate the nine workers and pay their wages during the dismissal. On 31 October 1998, the CLC also ruled that OMRON had in reality made a "business transfer" and that at least six of the nine unionists - including the union officers - should be reinstated. The KMWF alleges that the CLC rulings have been inadequate in protecting union leaders from anti-union dismissal and anti-union discrimination. This anti-union discrimination in employment succession clearly violates freedom of association principles.
65. 490. Finally, the KMWF addresses the issue of "obstruction of business", a charge it claims has been brought against the majority of key KMWF leaders and members who are arrested/detained (a list of the arrested/detained unionists is attached to the complaint). To expound concretely how the "obstruction of business" charge contravenes freedom of association and is used abusively, the KMWF describes the case of Korean Metal Workers' Federation President Dan Byung-ho. At 1 p.m. on the afternoon of 19 October 1998, South Korean police violently apprehended KMWF President (and KCTU Vice-President) Dan Byung-ho in front of the Century Workers' Union office at Namdaemun (Seoul) for "conspiring to obstruct business through general strike" and "inciting illegal strike action". The KMWF explains that Mr. Dan had his first hearing on 11 November and the trial records indicate the charges against him. These charges consist of: (1) holding press conferences relating to May Day, the 27-28 May general strike, the 22-23 July general strike and various other rallies; (2) discussing matters relating to those strikes at KCTU and KMWF meetings; (3) using computer networks to make union members aware of the dates and issues of the aforementioned strikes and rallies; (4) the content of his speeches at rallies that encouraged union members to have full attendance at the aforementioned strikes and rallies; (5) attendance at a KCTU leadership retreat in which the KCTU Central Committee made a resolution to go on strike under specific conditions; and (6) for co-organizing the aforementioned strikes and rallies.
66. 491. There are also parts of the trial in which the prosecutor insinuates that Mr. Dan is a dangerous element, branding him as "a person of hardline character with a past history of involvement in extremist/radical worker movement" (trial record, page 2). The "evidence" of this "past history" is elaborated in the preceding page, where the prosecution notes that Mr. Dan was first to fourth President of the KTUC national centre (predecessor of the KCTU), that Mr. Dan was the Co-President of the National Workers' Committee for Ratification of the ILO Core Conventions and for Labour Law Reform from 1990 to 1995, that he held office in various trade union organizations (Co-President of Chunnodae in 1995, KCTU Vice-President in 1995 and again in 1996, and as President of the Korean Metal Workers' Federation). This continues on page 3 of the trial record where Mr. Dan is condemned as "the Vice-President of a government-unrecognized organization, the KCTU and President of KCTU's largest affiliate federation, the KMWF".
67. 492. The KMWF insists that the content of the strikes and rallies which Mr. Dan was involved in were issues of interest to workers: celebrating International Workers' Day on 1 May; calling for a stop to redundancy dismissal; calling for a repeal of the law for temporary work brokering agencies; calling for a renegotiation with the IMF (in particular over labour market flexibilization); calling for an end to the downsizing of the public sector; calling on the Government to punish enterprises that commit unfair labour practices; calling for a reform of the chaebol economic system (as the current recession and mass lay-offs affecting tens of thousands of workers were triggered by a chaebol debt crisis), calling for social protection for, and a strategy or concrete plan to deal with, the newly unemployed (former) workers; and calling for employment security.
68. 493. The logic of the "obstruction of business" is that a strike or May Day rally can cause workers to walk off the job and therefore obstruct business. Construed as such, any strike can be deemed "illegal" as workers stop working in any strike. Another insinuation in the "obstruction of business" charge is that the strike is deemed "illegal". Although this is not written into the actual obstruction of business law - which does not define what an "obstruction of business" is - the prosecution has been interpreting the strikes as illegal by saying that they are "political" in nature and insinuating that they are plots to oppose the Government. Essentially, this logic is precariously balanced on the dubious assertion that issues such as employment security, downsizing of workers, social protection for laid off workers, or any of the issues mentioned above, are not issues that concern workers but are instead purely political. The KMWF contends that the "obstruction of business" charge has been used to dramatically curtail trade union activities and to penalize workers who strike, in direct contravention of freedom of association. Moreover, there has been a drastic increase in the imprisonment/detention of unionists in 1998 on account of their participation in collective industrial disputes/union activities in comparison to previous years.
69. 494. The KMWF concludes by stating that President Kim Dae Jung had led the high-level ILO tripartite mission to the Republic of Korea to believe that his administration was much more committed to human and workers' rights and that he would pursue measures that would allow the building of a new industrial relations system based on a climate of confidence. However, the "new culture of industrial relations" promised by Kim Dae Jung bears haunting similarities to the government handling of industrial relations during the past military dictatorships: mass arrests; warfare-like response to sit-in strikes; violations of workers' basic rights. In doing so, President Kim's actions support employers' mentality that financial difficulty - which nearly all Korean companies are undergoing during this recession - legitimizes a short-circuiting of the democratic process and workers' rights. The KMWF insists that the fact that companies are "facing economic difficulty" is not a free pass to ignore the existence of unions and erode workers' basic rights.
70. 495. In a communication dated 22 January 1999, the KMWF indicates that Mr. Dan Byung-ho was sentenced to two years' imprisonment on 12 January for "conspiring to obstruct business through general strikes" and "inciting strike action". According to the KMWF, the judge condemned him for "making the Korean economy worse". The judge also proclaimed that the two KMWF general strikes were illegal. The judge based his decision of "illegality" on the analysis that the content of the general strikes were actually political manoeuvres that were not legitimate concerns of workers. The KMWF asserts that this severe penalty illustrates the Government's intention to continue to harshly repress workers who are active in legitimate trade union activity.
71. D. The Government's further reply
72. Mando Machinery Workers' Union (MMWU) case
73. 496. The Government states that the Mando Machinery Workers' Union (MMWU) entered a partial strike for the 11-13 August period and a full-scale strike starting from 17 August. During the strikes, the MMWU unionists set up barricades at the front gate of the company to control the flow of people and products into and out of the premises, and waged sit-ins inside the premises, disabling the normal operation of the company. In order to disperse the unionists who illegally occupied the company premises during the MMWU strike on 3 September 1998, the police entered the premises and, as a result, a total of 2,483 strikers were arrested. The workers detained as a result of the MMWU strike numbered 46. Out of the total 46, one person was sentenced to imprisonment by the District Court and later pardoned (execution suspended) while he was on trial at the Appeals Court. The remaining 45 were all released with suspension of sentence (26 of them are now on trial at the Appeals Court). The Government affirms that no worker is now detained in relation to the MMWU strike.
74. 497. With regard to the violence surrounding the MMWU sit-in strike, the Government states that while the police were trying to break up unionists who continued to take illegal actions, a total of 20 people, including 18 policemen, one unionist and one civilian, were left injured. The injured policemen had been hit by unionists with steel pipes and other weapons. However, no injuries of pregnant women or children in the clash have been reported. Moreover, after the police were sent into the company premises on 3 September 1998, labour-management dialogue was resumed on 18 September and a bilateral agreement was reached on 23 October. The Government had made maximum efforts to help create an atmosphere for autonomous and independent labour relations and, ultimately, industrial peace, by mediating between the two parties to the last minute.
75. Hyundai Motors Workers' Union (HMWU) case
76. 498. The Government states that the allegation of a "police raid" by the union in relation to the HMWU strike is unfounded. Rather, in several cases, strike defence team members and some unionists, armed with steel pipes, assaulted the policemen who were protecting the company facilities. At that time, minor clashes took place between the strike defence team members armed with steel pipes and Molotov cocktails, and the riot policemen who were checking any inflow of illegal weapons. However, no lawsuits were filed in relation to these clashes. The Government stresses that the charges of obstruction of business and violence made against the unionists only involve illegal actions taken by them against high-ranking managers. According to the Government, the workers who were arrested or detained had led the prolonged strikes in illegal ways such as factory occupation, obstruction of business and assault of office workers. The detention of the workers can be reasonably justified as a legitimate way to defend national law and order. The KMWF's claim that the violence committed by some militant workers in the course of the strike was actually triggered by the police is groundless.
77. Sammi Specialty Steel Workers' Union case
78. 499. The Government then turns to the allegation that POSCO's takeover of the Sammi Specialty Steel on a P&A basis was aimed at removing 182 active unionists, including union leaders. It explains that on 17 February 1997, when the Changwon Specialty Steel Co., a POSCO subsidiary, took over the Changwon Plant of the Sammi Specialty Steel Co., some of the workers of the latter company had their employment relationship discontinued. The bone of contention, with regard to this issue, lies in whether the takeover in question was based on P&A (purchase of assets) or M&A (merger and acquisition) and, accordingly, was subject to the legal requirement of employment succession or not. The 182 workers whose employment relationship was discontinued claimed that the takeover in question had been an M&A and that the discontinuation of the employment relationship constituted unfair dismissals, and applied to the Labour Relations Commission for relief. The National Labour Relations Commission (NLRC) ruled on 8 December 1997 that the discontinuance of the employment relationship for the workers concerned constituted unfair dismissals without reasonable justification. The Ministry of Labour, respectful of the NLRC's decision, imposed penal sanctions on the management of Changwon Specialty Steel for violation of the Labour Standards Act regulation (on unfair dismissal) on 30 January 1998. The management of Changwon Specialty Steel refused to accept the NLRC's decision and filed an administrative suit on 27 December 1997. The Seoul Appeals Court ruled that the takeover had been based on M&A and, therefore, was required to ensure employment succession. However, the management appealed the verdict to the Supreme Court on 9 February 1999, maintaining that it would wait until the final court decision was made before taking measures to ensure employment succession.
79. Dong-hae Workers' Union case
80. 500. The Government then addresses the allegation that the Japanese company, OMRON, dismissed some former workers of Dong-hae Co. in the acquisition process on a P&A basis in order to break down the Dong-hae union and did not comply with the Labour Relations Commission's ruling (31 October 1998) that six dismissed workers be reinstated. On 20 March 1998, when OMRON Automotive Electronics Korea, Co. took over part of the Dong-hae Co., some of the former workers of Dong-hae had their employment relationship terminated. Nine of the workers whose employment relationship was discontinued claimed that the termination of the employment relationship constituted unfair dismissals and applied to the Labour Relations Commission for relief. The Seoul Regional Labour Relations Commission (on 25 June 1998) and the National Labour Relations Commission (on 30 October 1998) determined that only six cases constituted unfair dismissals. The company refused to accept the decision and filed an administrative suit before the Seoul Appeals Court on 14 November 1998. The Ministry of Labour, respectful of the NLRC's ruling, imposed penal sanctions on the management of the OMRON on 2 November 1998 on charges of violation of the provisions of the Labour Standards Act on unfair dismissals.
81. Information on the current situation of 87 people who KMWF argued were detained or wanted for arrest
82. 501. Regarding the 87 persons who the KMWF alleged were detained or wanted for arrest, the Government replies that only four persons are still detained. Among them only two individuals were detained as a result of strike action as follows: Kim Kwang-sik (Chairman of the Hyundai Motors Trade Union) on charges of special obstruction of the work of public officials and inflicting injuries on them, exercising violent acts, violation of the Assembly and Demonstration Act, obstruction of ordinary traffic and obstruction of business; Bae Mahn-soo (Chief Shop Steward, Hyundai Motors Trade Union) on charges of special obstruction of the work of public officials and inflicting injuries on them, exercising violent acts, inflicting bodily injury, violation of the Assembly and Demonstration Act, obstruction of ordinary traffic and obstruction of business. The Appeals Court sentenced Bae Mahn-soo to two years' and Kim Kwang-sik to one-and-a-half years' imprisonment on 13 May 1999. In its communication dated 9 March 2000, the Government indicates that there are no longer any detainees amongst the 87 persons mentioned by the KMWF. Kim Kwang-sik and Bae Man-soo were pardoned on 31 December 1999. Kim Myoung-ho was released on 12 January 2000 and Lee Hee was released on 12 May 1999.
83. 502. The Government stresses that from 1998 it has developed and implemented, in dealing with workers' illegal strikes and unlawful acts, the following three-step plan to minimize the number of arrests and to encourage amicable resolutions between the employers and the workers even in cases of violence and destruction by the workers arising from industrial disputes:
84. -- step 1: reduce the number of arrests by the police;
85. -- step 2: release at the prosecution level of as many arrested workers as possible on probation or other conditions, except for those who played a leading role in unlawful violent strike actions;
86. -- step 3: encourage the release at the trial level of prosecuted workers on bail, probation, or other conditions, except for those who played a leading role in violent acts.
87. The Government refined the above three-step plan in April 1999 with a view to further minimizing workers' arrests except in extreme cases, as follows:
88. -- minimizing arrests of workers;
89. -- applying fines to workers arrested rather than physically detaining them;
90. -- encouraging the employers to take disciplinary measures against offenders at the enterprise level; and
91. -- encouraging the employers to seek compensation for damages against the leading players in illegal strikes.
92. 503. Finally, concerning the two-year imprisonment sentence given to KMWF President Dan Byung-ho, the Government indicates that Dan Byung-ho was detained on 19 October 1998 on the charge of obstruction of business and was sentenced to one year imprisonment at the Appeals Court on 13 May 1999. On 15 August 1999, while he was serving his prison term, he was pardoned and released (with execution suspended). The Government adds that he was elected President of the KCTU on 17 September 1999.

E. The Committee's conclusions

1. 504. During its previous examination of this case the Committee had recalled that, while the Trade Union and Labour Relations Adjustment Act (TULRAA) which was enacted on 13 March 1997 contained a number of amendments which constituted progress towards acceptance of its previous recommendations, certain provisions that the Committee had deemed to be contrary to freedom of association principles had not been amended. In this respect, the Committee had noted that a second Tripartite Commission with more or less the same composition and mandate as the first was established in June 1998 to deal with a series of reforms on labour-related issues, including those relating to freedom of association, and that these reforms, if implemented, would necessitate the corresponding amendments to the TULRAA. The Committee notes the Government's statement that, due to the withdrawal of the Korean Employers' Federation (KEF), the Federation of Korean Trade Unions (FKTU) and the Korean Confederation of Trade Unions (KCTU) from the second Tripartite Commission, the latter ceased to function. The Committee notes nevertheless that a third Tripartite Commission with more or less the same composition as the first and second Commissions (with the exception of the KCTU) was launched in September 1999. This third Tripartite Commission is mandated to deal with a series of issues including those raised by the Committee during its previous examinations of this case. The Committee notes however that the FKTU withdrew from the third Tripartite Commission in November 1999. In this respect, the Committee would call on all parties to act in good faith and expresses its hope for continued dialogue in a tripartite manner on all the issues raised by it. The Committee proposes to review these various issues in the light of the information provided by the Government. At the outset, the Committee notes with interest that a number of measures have been adopted by the Government which constitute progress towards acceptance of a certain number of its recommendations and would encourage the Government to continue taking such measures with a view to complying with the Committee's remaining recommendations.
   • Allegations of a legislative nature
2. 505. With regard to the issue of the legalization of teachers' unions, the Committee had previously requested the Government to take the appropriate steps so as to ensure the right to organize of teachers and to register the Korean Teachers' and Education Workers' Union (CHUNKYOJO) so that it could legally defend and promote the interests of its members. The Committee notes the Government's statement that it submitted the "Act concerning the Establishment and Operation of Teachers' Unions" which secures basic labour rights for teachers to the National Assembly which adopted it in January 1999. This law entered into force on 1 July 1999. Moreover, CHUNKYOJO and another teachers' union, the Korean Union of Teaching and Educational Workers (KUTE) were registered on 2 July 1999. The Committee notes these developments with interest.
3. 506. Regarding the issue of industrial action in the form of workplace occupations, the Committee had noted that section 42(1) of the TULRAA prohibited any "... occupation of production facilities or installations related to important businesses or the equivalent thereof as determined by Presidential Decree". The Committee had considered in this respect that certain types of strike action, such as workplace occupations, should not be considered as unlawful unless they ceased to be peaceful or they interfered with the freedom to work and had requested the Government to provide information on the application in practice of section 42(1) (see 309th Report, para. 150). The Government indicates in this regard that this provision does not ban workplace occupations unless they obstruct other employees from working if they choose to do so. Moreover, no penal sanctions have been imposed under this provision since 1 January 1998. The Committee takes due note of this information.
4. 507. Concerning the lack of legal status of the KCTU, the Committee had requested the Government on several occasions to ensure that the KCTU was registered as a trade union organization. The Committee notes with interest from the information provided by the Government that the KCTU was recognized as a legal entity on 22 November 1999.
5. 508. With regard to the issues of the right to organize of public servants, and the lifting of the ban on third-party intervention in collective bargaining and industrial disputes, the Committee notes that the Government merely indicates that these issues will be the subject of discussions at the third Tripartite Commission. The Committee therefore proposes to reiterate its conclusions and recommendations concerning these issues.
6. 509. Regarding the issue of the right to organize of public servants, the Committee had noted at its March 1998 meeting that public servants would have the right to form associations (workplace councils) from 1 January 1999 (see 309th Report, para. 144). The Committee had noted with concern, however, that large categories of public servants would be excluded from joining these workplace councils. Hence, the Committee had noted that public servants from grades 1 to 5 would be excluded from workplace councils as would public servants belonging to special services, i.e. firefighters. Moreover, public servants involved in personnel and confidential work, budgeting and accounting, receiving and distributing goods, supervising general service staff, secretarial work, guarding security facilities and driving passenger cars or ambulances would also not be entitled to join workplace councils. The Committee notes from the Government's most recent communication that only 338,000 public servants out of a total of 930,000 are eligible to join these workplace councils. The Committee notes from the Government's most recent communication that only 338,000 public servants out of a total of 930,000 are eligible to join these workplace councils. In view of the restrictions on the right to associate of a wide range of public servants, the Committee had drawn the Government's attention to the fundamental principle that all public service employees, with the sole possible exception of the armed forces and the police, should be able to establish organizations of their own choosing to further and defend the interests of their members (Digest of decisions and principles of the Freedom of Association Committee, 4th edition, 1996, para. 206). The Committee would therefore reiterate its request to the Government to extend the right of association, recognized as of 1 January 1999 for certain categories of public servants, to all those categories of public servants who should enjoy this right in accordance with freedom of association principls.
7. 510. Furthermore, the Committee would recall that the denial of workers in the public sector to set up trade unions, where this right is enjoyed by workers in the private sector, with the result that their "associations" do not enjoy the same advantages and privileges as "trade unions", involves discrimination as regards government employed workers and their organizations as compared with private sector workers and their organizations. Such a situation gives rise to the question of compatibility of these distinctions with freedom of association principles according to which workers "without distinction whatsoever" shall have the right to establish and join organizations of their own choosing without previous authorization (see Digest, op. cit., para. 216). The Committee would recall further that the right to organize does not necessarily imply the right to strike which may be prohibited in the public service for public servants exercising authority in the name of the State or in essential services in the strict sense of the term, i.e. services whose interruption would endanger the life, personal safety or health of the whole or part of the population. This would, for example, be the case of firefighting services. Consequently, the Committee requests the Government to take steps to recognize, as soon as possible, the right to establish and join trade union organizations for all public servants who should enjoy this right in accordance with freedom of association principles.
8. 511. With regard to the lifting of the ban on third-party intervention in collective bargaining and industrial disputes, the Committee had noted from the report of the high-level tripartite mission that the KCTU, in particular, had notified the names of many advisers to the Ministry of Labour because non-notified persons were prohibited from intervening in collective bargaining or even making any comments about an industrial dispute under the terms of section 40(2) of the TULRAA. The KCTU had considered this measure to be tantamount to maintaining the ban on third-party intervention since non-notified persons who intervened in collective bargaining were liable to a maximum penalty of three years' imprisonment and/or 30 million won in fines (section 89(1) of the TULRAA). The Committee, for its part, had considered the notification requirement contained in section 40(1)(3) of the TULRAA to be onerous on unions and unjustified, especially in light of the prohibition contained in section 40(2) of the TULRAA. It had also considered that provisions such as section 89(1) entailed serious risks of abuse and were a grave threat to freedom of association. Consequently, the Committee, noting that the Government will review this issue, once again requests it to repeal the notification requirement contained in section 40 of the TULRAA as well as the penalties provided for in section 89(1) of the TULRAA for violation of the prohibition on persons not notified to the Ministry of Labour from intervening in collective bargaining or industrial disputes.
9. 512. At its March 1998 meeting, the Committee had regretted that, in taking steps to recognize trade union pluralism at the national and industrial levels, the Government did not consider organizations established at the enterprise level for which trade union pluralism would only be possible from the year 2002. It had noted the arguments put forward by the Government to justify this delay, including the instability in industrial relations and confusion over collective bargaining which could result therefrom. The Committee was nevertheless of the opinion that this additional period during which freedom of association principles would continue to be seriously infringed could be avoided by setting up a stable collective bargaining system in conformity with trade union pluralism. The Committee therefore had requested the Government to speed up the process of legalizing trade union pluralism at the enterprise level and to this end promote the implementation of a stable collective bargaining system (see 309th Report, para. 146). The Committee reiterates this request to the Government. It notes the Government's most recent statement in this respect. It regrets that the Government has decided to maintain its decision to postpone the recognition of trade union pluralism till the year 2002. It notes however that a draft bill that deals with collective bargaining in the context of trade union pluralism has been submitted to the National Assembly. The Committee requests the Government to provide the text of this bill so as to review its compatibility with freedom of association principles.
10. 513. At its March 1998 meeting (see 309th Report, para. 148), the Committee had noted that the TULRAA established a distinction between general public services and essential public services and that recourse could be had to compulsory arbitration for this second category of public services only after a recommendation of the Special Mediation Committee to this effect (sections 71(2), 74(1) and 62(3) of the TULRAA). The Committee had observed that the essential services specified were the following: railroad services (including inter-city rail), inner-city bus services, water, electricity, gas supply, oil refinery and supply services, hospital services, banking services and telecommunication services. However, the inner-city bus services and banking services (except for the Bank of Korea) would be considered as essential only until the year 2000. The Committee had recalled that recourse to compulsory arbitration, when this resulted in the prohibition of the right to strike, should be limited to services whose interruption would endanger the life, personal safety or health of whole or part of the population. The Committee had considered, on the basis of this definition, that the Mint, banking services, transport services and the petroleum sector did not constitute essential services in the strict sense of the term. They did constitute, however, services where a minimum negotiated service could be maintained in the event of a strike so as to ensure that the basic needs of the users of these services were satisfied. The Committee therefore had requested the Government to amend the list of essential public services contained in section 71 of the TULRAA in line with the above conclusions so that the right to strike was prohibited only in essential services in the strict sense of the term. Noting that this issue will be discussed at the Tripartite Commission, the Committee would reiterate this request to the Government.
11. 514. With regard to the issue of the payment of wages to full-time union officials, the Committee had noted that section 24 of the TULRAA prohibited employers from remunerating full-time union officials as of 1 January 2002 (see 309th Report, para. 152). The Committee had considered that the prohibition of the payment of full-time union officials by employers was a matter which should not be subject to legislative interference and had therefore called upon the Government to repeal section 24(2) of the TULRAA. The Committee would reiterate this request to the Government. It notes in this respect that a draft bill has been submitted to the National Assembly. The Committee requests the Government to provide the text of this bill so as to review its conformity with freedom of association principles.
12. 515. With regard to the provisions in the TULRAA concerning the denial of the dismissed and unemployed workers to keep their union membership and the ineligibility of non-members of trade unions to stand for office (sections 2(4)(d) and 23(1), respectively, of the TULRAA), the Committee had considered that the determination of conditions of eligibility of union membership or union office was a matter that should be left to the discretion of union by-laws and the public authorities should refrain from any intervention which might impair the exercise of this right by trade union organizations. The Committee, noting that the legislative process concerning the issue of dismissed trade union officials maintaining their membership is on hold, requests the Government to repeal the provisions concerning the denial of dismissed and unemployed workers to keep their union membership and the ineligibility of non-members of trade unions to stand for office (sections 2(4)(d) and 23(1) of the TULRAA.
13. 516. The Committee once again draws the Government's attention to the principles enunciated above and firmly hopes that these issues will be examined and resolved as quickly as possible in a manner compatible with freedom of association principles. The Committee requests the Government to keep it informed of deliberations within the Tripartite Commission or the National Assembly on all of these issues.
14. 517. As regards the legislative aspects of this case, the Committee requests the Government to provide information on any measures taken to give effect to the Committee's recommendations thereon.
    • Allegations of a factual nature
15. 518. The Committee notes with regret that the Government states that it is not possible to drop the remaining charges pending against Mr. Kwon Young-kil, former President of the KCTU. During its previous examination of this case (see 311th Report, para. 332), the Committee had noted with concern that Mr. Kwon still faced charges of violating the Law on Public Assembly and Demonstration and the Traffic Law, and that a criminal charge of intrusion into private premises was still pending against him for the holding of the inaugural congress of the KCTU at Yonsei University on 11 November 1995. The Committee had firmly insisted that the Government do everything in its power to ensure the dropping of all remaining charges which were brought against Mr. Kwon before the January 1997 strikes as a result of his trade union activities. The Committee notes with regret that despite its firm insistence on the dropping of all charges brought against Mr. Kwon, the latter is still being tried on these charges. It expresses the firm hope that he will not be convicted on these charges and requests the Government to keep it informed of the outcome of the trial.
16. 519. As regards the KCTU's allegation that 57 trade union leaders were arrested and detained and that arrest warrants were issued for 13 other KCTU leaders for participation in a May Day rally and two general strikes but that the Government later committed itself to withdraw all charges against those persons in an agreement reached between the KCTU and government representatives on 5 June 1998, the Committee notes that the Government acknowledges that the two parties reached an agreement on 5 June 1998. However, the Government contests that this agreement contained any commitment by it to drop all charges. Rather it relates to an agreement reached between the KCTU and the Government on issues to be discussed and implemented in the second Tripartite Commission. The Committee notes in effect that the contents of this agreement (a copy of which is annexed to the Government's reply) relate to a series of measures in the economic and labour-related fields to be discussed in the second Tripartite Commission.
17. 520. The Committee further notes with interest the Government's statement that out of the 70 KCTU leaders and activists detained or on trial or wanted for arrest, none are now under detention. The Committee requests the Government to indicate whether they have been released unconditionally.
18. 521. Regarding the alleged dismissal of two public servants, Lee Seung-chan and Kim Dong-il, for their involvement in the "Public Servants' Works Council Preparation Committee" a body responsible for organizing preparatory activities for the establishment of public servants' works councils, the Committee had urged the Government to take the necessary measures to ensure that these two public servants were immediately reinstated in their jobs (see 311th Report, para. 338). The Committee notes from the information provided by the Government that Mr. Kim was reinstated in his job in July 1999 after appealing to the Kwangju District and High Courts which both ruled in favour of Mr. Kim. The Committee notes with concern, however, that Mr. Lee Seung-chan has still not been reinstated since his case is still pending before the Seoul Administration Court. The Committee would recall that Mr. Lee was dismissed for violating legislation governing public servants which the Committee had, on previous occasions, considered to be contrary to freedom of association principles since it denied public servants the right to organize. In view of this fact and taking into account that public servants are legally entitled to establish workplace councils as of 1 January 1999, the Committee once again urges the Government to take the necessary measures to ensure that Mr. Lee Seung-chan is immediately reinstated in his job. It requests the Government to keep it informed of any progress made in this regard.
    • The KMWF's complaint
19. 522. The Committee notes that the KMWF's allegations concern violent police intervention to break peaceful strikes; large-scale arrest and detentions of strikers; laws that allow employers to dismiss workers unfairly and to ignore decisions of the National Labour Relations Commission for reinstatement.
20. 523. As regards alleged violent police intervention to break peaceful strikes, the Committee notes that the two examples given by the complainant concern sit-in strikes carried out by the Mando Machinery Workers' Union (MMWU) and the Hyundai Motors Workers' Union (HMWU) in their respective company premises. In both cases, the complainant protests the use of riot police to break peaceful sit-in strikes. While the Government does not contest the intervention of riot police in both cases, it contends that the police intervened "to disperse the unionists who illegally occupied the company premises during the MMWU strike" and to protect company facilities and check any inflow of weapons during the HMWU strike. The Government adds that some strikers had assaulted the police and office workers with steel pipes and other weapons. In this regard, the Committee would recall that it has previously considered that certain types of strike action, such as for example workplace occupations, should not be considered as unlawful unless they cease to be peaceful (see 307th Report, Case No. 1865 (Republic of Korea), para. 222). The Committee notes the complainant's contention, however, that the clashes that occurred during the course of the two strikes were provoked by 14,000 riot police in the MMWU strike and 15,000 riot police in the HMWU strike, who confronted the outnumbered sit-in strikers with, amongst others, tear-gas tanks, fork-lift cranes, fire engines, water cannons and steel pipes. The police intervention in the MMWU strike resulted in the arrest of 2,580 persons (2,483 by the Government's account) although many were released within ten days. Moreover, although 46 unionists were detained as a result of the MMWU strike, the Committee notes that none of them are still in detention.
21. 524. The Committee recalls in this respect that the authorities should resort to calling in the police in a strike situation only if there is a genuine threat to public order. The intervention of the police should be in proportion to the threat to public order and governments should take measures to ensure that the competent authorities receive adequate instructions so as to avoid the danger of excessive violence in trying to control strike action that might undermine public order (see Digest, op. cit., para. 582). Although the Government maintains that the intervention by the riot police and the subsequent detention of workers was justified as a legitimate way to defend national law and order, the Committee fails to see how national law and order were threatened in the cases of the MMWU and HMWU sit-in strikes which were carried out on company premises. In this regard, the Committee must note with serious concern that it has examined the phenomenon of police intervention in activities linked to collective labour disputes - on grounds of defending national law and order - leading to the large-scale arrest and detention of workers on various occasions in the past in the Republic of Korea. While reliance on police intervention in labour disputes may be the result of a culture which places a heavy emphasis on the security and stability of the country, the Committee is of the view that this sort of action only serves to aggravate industrial disputes. This point of view appears to be borne out by the complainant's assertion which is not disputed by the Government that the number of unionists arrested or detained in 1998 (since the establishment of the first Tripartite Commission) has increased dramatically in comparison to previous years. The Committee is convinced that it will not be possible for a stable industrial relations system to function harmoniously in the country as long as trade unionists are the subject of arrests and detentions. In view of the deteriorating social climate prevailing in the country, the Committee believes it would be particularly appropriate for the authorities to pursue measures which would allow for the building of an industrial relations system based on a climate of confidence. These measures would involve in particular limiting police intervention in labour disputes. In this regard, the Committee notes that the Government adopted a four-step plan in April 1999, part of which aims to minimize the arrest and detention of workers except in extreme cases. The Committee would request the Government to ensure that the part of its new plan which aims to minimize the arrest and detention of unionists is effectively implemented so that in future trade unionists are no longer arrested or detained for legitimate trade union activities. Furthermore, the Committee would call on all parties to exercise restraint in pursuing activities linked to labour disputes.
22. 525. As regards the situation of the 87 persons whom the KMWF alleged were detained (a list of these persons is reproduced in the annex to this case), the Committee notes the Government's statement that none are now under detention. The Committee notes, however, that the majority of persons listed in the annex to this case were charged with obstruction of business and that, according to the KMWF, this provision from the Penal Code (section 314) has been widely used to convict unionists who went on strike. The KMWF also alleges that the logic of the obstruction of business provision is that any strike or rally or demonstration which causes workers to walk off the job and therefore obstruct business can be deemed to be illegal. The KMWF finally alleges that this provision - which does not define what obstruction of business is - has been interpreted to construe strikes on issues such as employment security, downsizing of workers, social protection for laid-off workers, etc., to be political strikes and therefore illegal because the issues at stake are not of any concern to workers. The KMWF points out that the example of Dan Byung-ho, former KMWF President and current KCTU President, who was charged with obstruction of business for his participation in, and organization of, strikes and rallies on various issues including the issues mentioned above, is a case in point.
23. 526. The Committee notes that Dan Byung-ho, as well as the other unionists whose names appear in the annex, have now been released. It notes with concern, however, that the vast majority of them were arrested and detained on charges of obstruction of business which, if applied as alleged above, would tend to prevent strikes on economic and social issues as well as protest and sympathy strikes. The Committee would recall in this respect that the occupational and economic interests which workers defend through the exercise of the right to strike do not only concern better working conditions or collective claims of an occupational nature, but also the seeking of solutions to economic and social policy questions and problems facing the undertaking which are of direct concern to the workers. Organizations responsible for defending workers' socio-economic and occupational interests should be able to use strike action to support their position in the search for solutions to problems posed by major social and economic policy trends which have a direct impact on their members and on workers in general, in particular as regards employment, social protection and standards of living. Finally, while purely political strikes do not fall within the scope of the principles of freedom of association, trade unions should be able to have recourse to protest strikes, in particular where aimed at criticizing a government's economic and social policies and the right to strike should not be limited solely to industrial disputes that are likely to be resolved through the signing of a collective agreement (see Digest, op. cit., paras. 479, 480, 482 and 484).
24. 527. Noting that the Government has not responded to the KMWF's allegations on the interpretation and application of the provision concerning obstruction of business to persons involved in various forms of industrial action as described above, the Committee requests the Government to provide information on what exactly constitutes "obstruction of business", a charge for which the majority of unionists listed in the annex to this case were arrested and detained.
25. 528. As regards the alleged unfair dismissals of 182 union leaders and members of the Sammi Specialty Steel Workers' Union (SSSWU) on 17 February 1997, the Committee notes that the Government does not dispute that the discontinuation of the employment relationship of the 182 workers concerned constituted unfair dismissals. Rather the Government indicates that further to the decision of the National Labour Relations Commission (NLRC) on 8 December 1997 that these dismissals were unfair, the Ministry of Labour imposed penal sanctions on the management of Changwon Specialty Steel Company (which took over the Sammi Specialty Steel Company) on 30 January 1998 for violating the provision of the Labour Standards Act on unfair dismissals. However, the Government states that the workers concerned have not been reinstated in their jobs since the management appealed the NLRC's decision first to the Seoul Appeals Court and then to the Supreme Court. Similarly, as regards the alleged unfair dismissals of workers of the Dong-hae union, when the Dong-hae Company was taken over by OMRON Automotive Electronics Korea Company on 20 March 1998, the Committee notes the Government's statement that the NLRC determined on 30 October 1998 that six workers had been unfairly dismissed. However, the company appealed against the NLRC's decision to the Seoul Appeals Court and the Government, in the meantime, imposed penal sanctions on the management of the OMRON company for violating the provision on unfair dismissals of the Labour Standards Act on 2 November 1998.
26. 529. While noting that the corresponding legal sanctions have been applied to the companies concerned, the Committee would recall that no person should be dismissed or prejudiced in his or her employment by reason of trade union membership or legitimate trade union activities (see Digest, op. cit., para. 696) and it is for governments to ensure that this principle is respected. The Committee therefore requests the Government to take the necessary measures to enable the 182 members of the Sammi Specialty Steel Workers' Union (dismissed in February 1997) and the six members of the Dong-hae union (dismissed in March 1998) to secure reinstatement in their posts in the Changwon Specialty Steel Company, and the OMRON company respectively. It further requests the Government to keep it informed of the outcome of the court proceedings in these two cases.

Imprisoned Korean Metal Workers' Federation (KMWF) union activists mentioned

1. in the first communication of the KMWF (released subsequently)
2. Name
3. Position Union
4. (Accused of/Charged with)
5. DAN Byung-ho
6. President (Conspiracy to obstruct Korean Metal Workers'
7. business through general strike) Federation (KMWF)
8. KIM Myong-ho
9. Director, Policy Department KMWF Ulsan Regional
10. (Violation of National Security Law, Council
11. Youngnam Committee case)
12. LEE Hee
13. Director, Publicity Department KMWF Ulsan Regional
14. (Violation of National Security Law, Council
15. Youngnam Committee case)
16. JEONG Yun-seup
17. Vice-Chairperson KMWF Inchon-Buchon
18. (Obstruction of business Regional Council
19. (general strike))
20. OH Se-yong
21. Employment Policy Director KMWF Kyungbuk Regional
22. (Obstruction of business, Council
23. Mando Machinery)
24. KIM Kwang-shik
25. President Vice-President (KMWF) Hyundai Motors
26. (Obstruction of business (strike); Workers' Union (HMWU)
27. prosecution has requested seven
28. years' imprisonment)
29. BAE Mahn-soo
30. Chief Shop steward, Ulsan Hyundai Motors
31. (Obstruction of business (strike); Workers' Union (HMWU)
32. also May Day strike; prosecution has
33. requested five years' imprisonment)
34. KIM Hyung-joon
35. Chief Shop steward, Jeunju Hyundai Motors
36. (Obstruction of business (strike)) Workers' Union (HMWU)
37. KIM Hyung-ryul
38. Former Chair, HMWU Jeunju Hyundai Motors
39. (Obstruction of business (strike)) Workers' Union (HMWU)
40. JEE Jin-guen
41. Shop steward Hyundai Motors
42. (Obstruction of business (strike)) Workers' Union (HMWU)
43. LEE Deuk-ki
44. Shop steward Hyundai Motors
45. (Obstruction of business (strike)) Workers' Union (HMWU)
46. IM Jong-joon
47. Shop steward Hyundai Motors
48. (Obstruction of business (strike)) Workers' Union (HMWU)
49. YOO Ki-joon
50. Shop steward Hyundai Motors
51. (Obstruction of business (strike)) Workers' Union (HMWU)
52. KOO Ja-young
53. Assistant Shop Steward Hyundai Motors
54. (Obstruction of business (strike)) Workers' Union (HMWU)
55. LEE Sang-wook
56. Chairperson, Mintu-wi Hyundai Motors
57. (Obstruction of business (strike)) Workers' Union (HMWU)
58. PARK Sang-cheul
59. Chairperson, Kong-so-wi Hyundai Motors
60. (Obstruction of business (strike)) Workers' Union (HMWU)
61. CHAE Kyoo-jeong
62. Member Hyundai Motors
63. (Obstruction of business (strike)) Workers' Union (HMWU)
64. JEONG Jae-shik
65. Shop steward Hyundai Motors
66. (Obstruction of business (strike)) Workers' Union (HMWU)
67. KIM Ki-soo
68. Chief Shop steward Hyundai Motors
69. (Obstruction of business (strike)) Workers' Union (HMWU)
70. Nam Yang-hui
71. Shop Steward Hyundai Motors
72. (Obstruction of business (strike)) Workers' Union (HMWU)
73. LEE Dong-hee
74. Dismissed worker Hyundai Motors
75. (Obstruction of business (strike)) Workers' Union (HMWU)
76. KIM Jong-hyun
77. President Hanyong Industry TU
78. (Obstruction of business (strike))
79. KIM Sang-ryul
80. General Secretary Hanyong Industry TU
81. (Obstruction of business (strike))
82. KIM Hui-dae
83. Director, Organizing Department
84. (Obstruction of business (strike)) Hanyong Industry TU
85. KIM Kwang-ho
86. Director, Education Department
87. (Obstruction of business (strike)) Hanyong Industry TU
88. MOON Sang-ki
89. President Inchon Iron and
90. (Obstruction of business (strike)) Steel TU
91. NAM Taek-kyu
92. Director, Industrial Action Kia Motors
93. Department (Violence, May Day rally)
94. LEE, Sang-deuk
95. Director, Organizing Department Kia Motors
96. (Violence, May Day rally;
97. illegal strike, 27-28 May)
98. IM Jae-han
99. Director, Organizing Department Kia Motors
100. (Violence, May Day rally;
101. illegal strike, 27-28 May)
102. SHIN Tae-sub
103. Director, Education and Publicity Kia Motors
104. Department (Gang violence
105. (skirmish with management))
106. WU Hyun-Kyu
107. Director, General Affairs Department Kia Motors
108. (Gang violence
109. (skirmish with management))
110. JUNG Yong-Hwan
111. Member (Gang violence Kia Motors
112. (skirmish with management))
113. KIM Hyun-Young
114. Member (Gang violence Kia Motors
115. (skirmish with management))
116. JUNG In-sun
117. Member (Gang violence Kia Motors (skirmish with
118. management))
119. KANG Sung-min
120. Member (Gang violence Kia Motors
121. (skirmish with management))
122. CHA Jin-gap
123. Member (Gang violence Kia Motors
124. (skirmish with management))
125. CHA Jae-kyung
126. Member (Gang violence Kia Motors
127. (skirmish with management))
128. KIM, Dae-soo
129. Member (Gang violence Kia Motors
130. (skirmish with management))
131. PAK Sung-kyu
132. Member (Gang violence Kia Motors
133. (skirmish with management))
134. IM Jong-hoon
135. Member (Gang violence Kia Motors
136. (skirmish with management))
137. KIM Kil-soo
138. Member (Gang violence Kia Motors
139. (skirmish with management))
140. YEON Chang-heung
141. Member (Gang violence Kia Motors
142. (skirmish with management))
143. OH Jin-sun
144. President (Illegal strike, occupation Anam Industry TU
145. of the plant, obstruction of business)
146. IM Kyung-mee
147. General Secretary (Illegal strike, Anam Industry TU
148. occupation of the plant,
149. obstruction of business)
150. YOOK Hwa-sun
151. General Affairs Department Anam Industry TU
152. (Illegal strike, occupation of
153. the plant, obstruction of business)
154. HWANG Sung-guen
155. President (Obstruction of business) Mando Machinery TU
156. KIM Jong-il
157. Director, Industry Safety Department Mando Machinery TU
158. (Obstruction of business)
159. SHIN Shi-yeun
160. Director, Culture Department Mando Machinery TU
161. (Obstruction of business)
162. HWANG Jong-kyu
163. Director, Organizing Department Mando Machinery TU
164. (Obstruction of business)
165. JUNG Byung-rok
166. Chairperson, Pyungtaek Branch Mando Machinery TU
167. (Obstruction of business)
168. HWANG Ok-doo
169. Vice-Chairperson, Pyungtaek Branch Mando Machinery TU
170. (Obstruction of business)
171. OH Jin-soo
172. Director, Organizing Department, Mando Machinery TU
173. Pyungtaek Branch
174. (Obstruction of business)
175. YOON Hee-yong
176. Chairperson, Kyungju Branch Mando Machinery TU
177. (Obstruction of business)
178. YUH In-soo
179. Shop steward, Kyungju Branch Mando Machinery TU
180. (Obstruction of business)
181. JEUNG Yeun-jae
182. Shop steward, Kyungju Branch Mando Machinery TU
183. (Obstruction of business)
184. KIM Hak-ryu
185. Chairperson, Asan Branch Mando Machinery TU
186. (Obstruction of business)
187. YOO Soo-mahn
188. Vice-Chairperson, Asan Branch Mando Machinery TU
189. (Obstruction of business)
190. LEE Shin-jae
191. Director, Research Department, Mando Machinery TU
192. Asan Branch (Obstruction of business)
193. KIM Yong-dae
194. Officer, Education Department, Mando Machinery TU
195. Asan Branch (Obstruction of business)
196. KIM Yong-kwan
197. Director, Security Department, Mando Machinery TU
198. Asan Branch (Obstruction of business)
199. KOH Jong-hee
200. Shop steward, Asan Branch Mando Machinery TU
201. (Obstruction of business)
202. LEE Choong-ern
203. Chairperson, Iksan Branch Mando Machinery TU
204. (Obstruction of business)
205. YOOK Jong-keun
206. General Secretary, Iksan Branch Mando Machinery TU
207. (Obstruction of business)
208. LEE Seung-yeup
209. Director, Organizing Department, Mando Machinery TU
210. Iksan Branch (Obstruction of business)
211. LEE Jahng-ho
212. Director, Education Department, Mando Machinery TU
213. Iksan Branch (Obstruction of business)
214. JEUNG Byung-wook
215. Director, Publicity Department, Mando Machinery TU
216. Iksan Branch (Obstruction of business)
217. SHIN Dong-jin
218. Member, Iksan Branch Mando Machinery TU
219. (Obstruction of business)
220. CHOI Sung-kyu
221. Member, Iksan Branch Mando Machinery TU
222. (Obstruction of business)
223. HAN Sang-bae
224. Chairperson, Moonmark Branch Mando Machinery TU
225. (Obstruction of business)
226. LEE Hyun-woo
227. General Secretary, Moonmark Branch Mando Machinery TU
228. (Obstruction of business)
229. BAE Yeon-ghil
230. Publicity Director, Moonmark Branch Mando Machinery TU
231. (Obstruction of business)
232. JEONG Ik-shee
233. Director, Industry Safety Department, Mando Machinery TU
234. Moonmark Branch
235. (Obstruction of business)
236. Update from Hyundai Motors Workers' Union: Detained unionists out on bail but
237. awaiting trial
238. HWANG, Chee-soo
239. First Vice-President Hyundai Motors
240. (Obstruction of business (strike)) Workers' Union
241. JOO Yoon-seok
242. General Secretary Hyundai Motors
243. (Obstruction of business (strike)) Workers' Union
244. PAK Yoo-ki
245. Director, Planning Department Hyundai Motors
246. (Obstruction of business (strike)) Workers' Union
247. PAK Byeong-seok
248. Director, Industrial Health and Hyundai Motors
249. Safety (Obstruction of business Workers' Union
250. (strike))
251. CHO Wong-rae
252. Member (Obstruction of business Hyundai Motors
253. (strike), violence)) Workers' Union
254. PAK Chang-kyung
255. Shop steward (Obstruction of Hyundai Motors
256. business (strike), violence)) Workers' Union
257. KIM Byeong-sam
258. Member (Obstruction of business Hyundai Motors
259. (strike), violence)) Workers' Union
260. JEE Jin-seong
261. Chief Shop Steward Hyundai Motors
262. (Obstruction of business (strike)) Workers' Union
263. Update from Hyundai Motors Workers' Union: Detained union activists mentioned
264. in the second communication of the KMWF (released subsequently)
265. LEE Jin-yoon
266. Shop steward (Obstruction of Hyundai Motors
267. business (strike), violence) Workers' Union
268. KIM Tae-kon
269. Shop steward (Obstruction of Hyundai Motors
270. business (strike)) Workers' Union
271. LEE Hyoen-woo
272. Vice-President (Obstruction Hyundai Motors
273. of business (strike)) Workers' Union
274. KANG Byeong-tae
275. Assistant Shop Steward Hyundai Motors
276. (Obstruction of business (strike)) Workers' Union
277. JEON Yong-kuk
278. Assistant Director, Research and Hyundai Motors
279. Statistics (Obstruction of business Workers' Union
280. (strike) May Day))
281. HUH Kyung-ho
282. Shop steward (Obstruction of Hyundai Motors
283. business (strike), violence)) Workers' Union
284. Hyundai Motors Workers' Union
285. KANG Bong-jin
286. Shop steward (Obstruction of Hyundai Motors
287. business (strike), violence)) Workers' Union