Controversy Surrounds Female Soldier's Miscarriage in Army Unit

Allegations have emerged of workplace harassment, including forced early reporting and verbal abuse, against a pregnant female soldier in the Army's Capital Defense Command, leading to her miscarriage after experiencing repeated bleeding. The investigative team at Aju Economy consulted five lawyers, including former military legal officers and human rights advocates, who assessed the legal implications of the case. They indicated a high likelihood of applying the military law's abuse provisions, suggesting that internal disciplinary actions are probable and could escalate to criminal charges depending on the severity of the case.

According to the Aju Economy investigative team on July 22, the Army's Capital Defense Command is currently investigating allegations against Lieutenant Colonel A, who reportedly issued inappropriate orders and engaged in verbal abuse towards subordinate officers. Lieutenant Colonel A is accused of using his authority to intimidate Major B and Captain C, suggesting, "Shall we see how the pen moves?" as he exerted his command power.

Specifically, Captain C, despite informing her superiors of her pregnancy, allegedly faced forced early reporting and unreasonable work demands, including being ordered to assume a prone position, which ultimately led to her miscarriage after prolonged harassment. This situation is expected to have significant repercussions.

In military abuse cases, once reported, immediate separation of the victim and perpetrator typically occurs. Following this, investigations are conducted, and if the severity is confirmed, disciplinary actions such as suspension, demotion, or dismissal are imposed on the involved officers. These disciplinary measures are independent of any criminal convictions. If the case is serious, it may be referred to military police for investigation and subsequently to military prosecutors for trial in a military court. It is reported that this case is currently under investigation by the Capital Defense Command following the separation of the involved parties.

Regarding the potential severity of disciplinary actions, lawyers believe that demotion or harsher penalties are likely. Byung-sik Byeon, a representative lawyer from Ilro Law Firm and a former military prosecutor, stated, "If there are multiple violations, including verbal abuse, sexual harassment, and abuse of power, and if there are two or more victims, the repeated nature of the offenses could lead to penalties exceeding the basic disciplinary actions of suspension or demotion."

However, the decision on dismissal will depend on factors such as the ability to prove causation, the victim's wishes, and the perpetrator's response. Ha Joo-hee, a representative lawyer from Yulrip Law Firm, noted, "While the case itself is serious enough to provoke public outrage, it is difficult to conclude that it will automatically lead to dismissal."

On the matter of criminal charges, there is a consensus that Lieutenant Colonel A's actions likely fall under Article 62 of the Military Criminal Act concerning abuse. The failure to provide maternal protection time during pregnancy is seen as a strong basis for asserting abuse of power or coercion. Ha explained, "If recognized as abuse of power, the penalty could be up to five years in prison, while coercion could lead to up to three years in prison or a fine of up to 7 million won."

Given the trend of investigative agencies broadly recognizing abuse, the imposition of unreasonable early reporting on a pregnant soldier is likely to be classified as either abuse of power or coercive abuse. Bae Yeon-gwan, a partner lawyer at YK Law Firm and a former military prosecutor, pointed out, "The pressure to wield command authority while forcing a pregnant soldier to report early every day could constitute coercive abuse." He emphasized that the occurrence of a miscarriage is a serious and tragic outcome, suggesting that future investigations and legal judgments will be stringent.

Yoo Wang-hyun, a lawyer from Uwon Law Firm and a former human rights advisor to the Capital Defense Command, stated, "If harm is communicated to compel someone to perform an act they are not obligated to do, it could constitute coercion. Specifically, ordering a pregnant officer to assume a prone position could fall under coercion." The Military Criminal Act strictly prohibits abuse, and there is a significant difference between ordering healthy male soldiers or non-commissioned officers to assume a prone position and ordering a pregnant officer to do so.

Additionally, actions such as threatening to "show my power" while clenching a fist could be classified as intimidation or coercion, and specific behaviors, such as swinging a fist in the air, could potentially be recognized as assault.

Song Seung-hwan, a representative lawyer at Solugen Law Firm and a former naval academy graduate and prosecutor, explained, "While the crime of coercion under criminal law requires proving that an obligation-free act was demanded in addition to mere intimidation, the military law's aggravated coercion provisions, which are applicable here, have similar penalties (up to five years in prison), making it easier to apply aggravated coercion in practice."

Regarding the establishment of abuse of power, the necessity of proving an obligation-free act may become a contentious issue. Yoo added, "If someone is compelled to perform an act they are not obligated to do through the abuse of power, it could constitute abuse of power. However, since military personnel are generally required to perform assigned duties, whether the ordered task was genuinely unnecessary or prohibited is somewhat ambiguous, warranting further investigation and legal debate."

Furthermore, lawyers predict that the most critical issue in both criminal prosecution and disciplinary actions will be proving the causal link between the abuse and the miscarriage. Ha stated, "If the investigation results or special medical opinions establish causation, the penalties for the abuse could be more severe, and this could serve as a key basis for the victim's civil claims for damages in the future."

Byeon noted, "The causes of miscarriage are varied, necessitating medical clarification, and it is challenging to establish a clear causal link solely based on verbal abuse and insults. However, given that the subordinate was assigned unreasonable tasks despite disclosing her pregnancy, the harassment could be a contributing factor to the miscarriage."

Song also remarked, "Even if a miscarriage occurred due to the perpetrator's abusive actions, proving the causal link in court without any doubt may be practically difficult. Therefore, the outcome of the miscarriage may be reflected as a factor in determining the severity of the perpetrator's punishment rather than constituting a separate crime like assault."

Ultimately, the severity of the disciplinary action against Lieutenant Colonel A will likely depend on how thoroughly military investigative agencies can demonstrate the persistence of the abuse and the extent of the infringement on maternal protection.