”The drinks that women pour for me taste better”... After being fired for sexual harassment, he sued, claiming it was just an old man joke = Korea

An executive of a private non-profit organization who was fired for sexual harassment in the workplace filed a lawsuit seeking confirmation of dismissal, claiming that the punishment was too severe, but lost the case on appeal, just as he did in the original trial.
The executive, Defendant A, filed a lawsuit claiming that his remarks were "dad jokes," and the court ruled that it was "a textbook example of sexual harassment in the workplace."
The Gwangju High Court dismissed the defendant A's appeal against the Jeolla Creative Economy Innovation Center, a foundation, for a lawsuit to determine whether dismissal was invalid.
The center announced on the 28th that it had rejected the allegations. Defendant A sexually harassed numerous subordinates on nine occasions between December 2022 and August last year, and was dismissed by the center.
Defendant A went too far, telling staff at a meal, "The sake that's poured for me by a woman tastes the best," and telling a staff member he had left, "Do you think I'll have a chance now?"
The Center judged that Defendant A violated the duty to maintain dignity, but Defendant A filed a lawsuit to invalidate the dismissal, claiming that it was just a light joke in the style of an old man's joke.
According to Defendant A, "A significant portion of the disciplinary measures taken by the foundation, including physical contact, were not true, and the other remarks were made as so-called 'dad jokes' to elicit laughs."
Defendant A filed a lawsuit arguing that, according to social standards, there was no disciplinary reason that was so serious that the employment relationship could not be continued.
The trial court ruled that "the case constituted sexual harassment in the workplace, and disciplinary action was justified." The second trial also found that the dismissal of Defendant A was appropriate.
The appeals court said, "Defendant A's remarks went beyond what could be considered a joke.
The court ruled that "most of the abuse was sexual in nature, uniformly low-ranking, and extremely persistent and repetitive, targeting a large number of young female employees."
In addition, "Most of the victims were given performance evaluations by Defendant A and the decision on whether to renew their contracts was made. Objectively, this is a typical example of workplace sex.
The appeals court said, "The foundation's rules regarding sexual harassment reflect the principle of zero tolerance, and if the employment relationship is maintained, the recurrence of the harassment will not occur."
Considering that there is no guarantee that they will not be expelled, that it is practically difficult to separate them from the victims, and that the majority of the victims are currently employed, the court's decision is justified."