Court rules Korean War veteran with AWOL record can’t be buried at national cemetery
A Seoul court has ruled that a Korean War veteran with a 10-month absent without leave (AWOL) record cannot be buried at the Seoul National Cemetery, ruling in favor of the cemetery’s decision to deny his burial.
The cemetery’s director had been sued by the family of the deceased veteran in 2022 as the family challenged the cemetery’s decision to deny burial for the veteran.
Before his death, the veteran, whose identity has been withheld, was honored with various medals, including the Hwarang and Chungmu Orders of Military Merit, for his service during the 195053 Korean War.
Following his military discharge, he worked as a public servant, holding positions at the Ministry of Foreign Affairs and the Prime Minister’s Office. He earned an additional recognition with the Order of Service Merit.
He was granted national meritorious status in 1988.
Upon his death, his family requested burial at the Seoul National Cemetery in Dongjak District, which the cemetery rejected.
Its internal review committee deemed him ineligible for burial due to his desertion history during military service. The decision was made in accordance with the National Cemetery Act, which stipulates that “individuals who undermine the honor of the National Cemetery are deemed ineligible for burial.”
In May 2022, the family members filed a lawsuit against the head of the national cemetery, challenging the decision. They said that considering the veteran’s various medal awards and post-discharge public service, the military record about his desertion was an administrative error.
The Seoul Administrative Court said Sunday it ruled in the cemetery head’s favor in February, acknowledging that the deceased veteran had gone AWOL for about 10 months before rejoining his unit.
“Considering his sacrifices and contributions, the individual can be deemed eligible for burial at the national cemetery,” the court said in its ruling.
“However, deserting his unit for approximately 10 months during his military service cannot be considered a minor incident, and no other special circumstances justifying his action were identified.”