Neglect of Duty (Military Service Misconduct)

The full range of acts in which a soldier fails to faithfully perform his or her service obligations, thereby becoming subject to disciplinary action or criminal punishment

Neglect of Duty (Military Service Misconduct)

Overview

Neglect of duty (不實服務, busil bokmu) is a collective term for acts in which a soldier or a person subject to military service obligations neglects or fails to faithfully perform the duties and service obligations assigned to him or her without justifiable grounds. Such acts are subject to disciplinary measures or criminal punishment under the Framework Act on the Status and Service of Military Personnel (hereinafter the Military Personnel Service Framework Act), the Military Personnel Act, the Military Service Act, and the Military Criminal Act, and the category broadly encompasses everything from mere dereliction at work to leaving one's guard post, unauthorized absence, and abandonment of duty. In recent years, with changes in human rights awareness and working conditions within barracks and a decline in military manpower resources, the criteria for judging neglect of duty and the methods of sanction are being reorganized.

Main Content

Concept and Scope

Neglect of duty is divided largely into two layers. The first consists of acts that violate service norms—such as the duty of good faith under Article 10 of the Military Personnel Service Framework Act and the duty to perform one's duties under Article 11—and thus constitute grounds for disciplinary action. The second consists of acts that directly contravene penal provisions of the Military Criminal Act, such as abandonment of duty (Article 21), neglect of duty (Article 22), and leaving guard duty (Article 23). Typical examples include tardiness, early departure, leaving one's post during work, failure to obey orders, and sleeping while on duty; absence from service by social service personnel or industrial technical personnel is also classified as neglect of duty under the Military Service Act.

Legal Basis

Military Personnel Service Framework Act: Prescribes the basic duties of military personnel (good faith, obedience, performance of duties, confidentiality, etc.) and service discipline
Military Personnel Act: Prescribes the types of disciplinary action (dismissal, removal from office, demotion, suspension, reduction of pay, reprimand) and procedures
Military Criminal Act: Penal provisions on abandonment of duty, neglect of duty, leaving guard duty, unauthorized absence, etc.
Military Service Act: Punishment for absence from service and failure to perform service without justifiable grounds by social service personnel, industrial technical personnel, etc.
State Public Officials Act and Local Public Officials Act: Provisions on the duty of good faith applied mutatis mutandis to military civilian employees, etc.

Main Types

1. Departure from the workplace: Unauthorized departure during working hours, violation of leave and overnight-pass regulations, leaving during guard duty

2. Dereliction of duty: Sleeping while on duty, failure to conduct patrols, failure to obey a commander's orders, omission of reports

3. Evasion of service: Abuse of sick leave or requested leave, submission of false medical certificates, unauthorized absence by social service personnel

4. Conduct unbecoming: Neglect of duty combined with acts that undermine service order, such as drinking, gambling, or assault

5. Violation of the duty of good faith under the State Public Officials Act: Violation of the prohibition on concurrent positions by military civilian employees, leaking official secrets, etc.

Sanctions and Procedures

When neglect of duty is discovered, the unit to which the person belongs convenes a disciplinary committee under the Military Personnel Act. Minor cases are concluded with a warning or caution, but if the conduct is repeated or intentional intent is recognized, heavy disciplinary measures such as reduction of pay, suspension, or demotion may be imposed. Where criminal liability is at issue, jurisdiction falls to the military prosecution and military courts; with the 2022 amendment to the Military Court Act, appeals in peacetime military cases became subject to the jurisdiction of the Seoul High Court, expanding the scope of review by the civilian judiciary. Violations of the Military Service Act (such as absence from service by social service personnel) are prosecuted by the ordinary prosecution service, and absence from service without justifiable grounds may result in a prison sentence.

Criteria for Judgment and Issues

Whether neglect of duty is established is determined by comprehensively considering (1) intent, (2) the degree to which work was impeded, (3) repetitiveness, (4) the impact on the command system, and (5) whether the duty to maintain the dignity of a soldier was violated. In recent years, as overwork, lack of sleep, and mental health problems have been raised as causes of neglect of duty, there is growing criticism that diagnosing causes and improving the service environment should accompany, rather than simply punishing, such conduct.

Latest Trends

As of 2024–2025, the environment surrounding neglect of duty is changing in three directions.

First, the decline in military manpower resources and the increase in workload. As military service resources decline sharply, on-duty and guard duty for the remaining forces has increased, and a two-sided debate is under way: concern that the criteria for charging minor dereliction of duty as neglect of duty may become stricter, and at the same time the argument that excessive work itself becomes a cause of neglect of duty.

Second, the civilianization of the military judicial system. With the transfer of peacetime military appeals to civilian courts and the reduction of military court jurisdiction, the criminal handling of neglect-of-duty cases is increasingly coming into contact with the ordinary judicial system.

Third, strengthened management of barracks human rights and mental health. The Ministry of National Defense is pursuing early identification of those unfit for service, expanded mental health examinations, and more granular guidelines on commanders' disciplinary discretion, while the management of social service personnel is also shifting to a preventive management system centered on preventing absence from service.

Meanwhile, parliamentary inspections and Board of Audit and Inspection reviews of the service conditions of alternative service personnel, such as social service personnel and industrial technical personnel, continue every year, and neglect of duty is expanding beyond an internal military discipline issue into a matter of the credibility and fairness of the military service system as a whole.