Airport Union Member Faces Property Damage Charge Over Alleged Toilet Clogging During Strike

A controversy has erupted at Incheon International Airport involving allegations that a union member intentionally clogged toilets during a strike, leading to the case being forwarded to prosecutors. While one union member faces charges of property damage, the broader union leadership has been cleared of involvement, raising questions about the nature of the alleged offense and the extent of union responsibility.

The incident occurred during a strike by employees of a subsidiary of the Incheon International Airport Corporation. The union was demanding a shift from a 3-crew, 2-shift system to a 4-crew, 2-shift system, along with increased staffing. Police have referred one union member, identified as 'A', to prosecutors, citing evidence such as the timing of the toilet clogging after 'A' used the restroom.

“

The situation currently relies solely on circumstantial evidence and speculation.

However, police investigations into the union's local chapter leaders and environmental branch leaders, who were also implicated by the airport corporation, yielded no evidence of their involvement or direction in the alleged act. This suggests that the incident, if proven, was an isolated act by an individual rather than a coordinated union strategy. The airport corporation had initially pushed for an investigation into potential organized conspiracy by the Korean Public Service and Transport Workers' Union (KPTU).

“

Clogging the toilet could have happened normally during regular use. I remember the restrooms were not managed properly because the cleaning staff were on strike.

The case presents a novel legal challenge: whether intentionally clogging a toilet can be classified as property damage under South Korean law. The relevant article in the Criminal Act stipulates punishment for those who damage, conceal, or otherwise impair the utility of another's property. However, applying this to a clogged toilet is considered highly unusual and may set a precedent.

Lawyers representing the accused union member argue that the evidence is circumstantial and that the clogging could have been accidental, exacerbated by the lack of proper maintenance during the strike. They also point out that the situation was a result of the strike, not a malicious intent to damage property. The KPTU has expressed concern for the union member facing charges and is monitoring the outcome. The airport corporation stated that if the charges are confirmed, the subsidiary will take appropriate disciplinary action according to its internal regulations.

“

The union's direction was not true. It is a matter of great concern for the union that a member participating in the strike is suffering.

The Hankyoreh's reporting highlights the complexities of labor disputes and the legal interpretations that arise. This case will likely be closely watched as it delves into the definition of property damage and the boundaries of union activity during strikes in South Korea.

“

If the charges are confirmed, the subsidiary will take action according to its regulations.