Workplace Harassment Investigation Checklist for Employers in Korea

A workplace harassment investigation in Korea must be objective, begin without delay, and protect confidentiality throughout these are legal duties under the Labor Standards Act, not best-practice suggestions [1]. This checklist walks global HR teams through each investigation phase, from preliminary assessment to the final report and remedial measures.

The short answer

Once an employer receives a harassment report or becomes aware of possible harassment, Article 76-3 of the Labor Standards Act requires an objective investigation conducted without delay, interim protection for the affected employee where needed, confidentiality by everyone involved, and appropriate measures if harassment is confirmed with the victim's opinion heard before discipline is decided [1]. A structured, documented process is also the employer's strongest protection if the case is later disputed [2].

When this applies

Use this checklist whenever your Korean entity investigates an internal harassment report whether the report came through a formal channel, a manager, or an anonymous submission. It applies equally when regional or global HR runs the process from outside Korea: the Korean procedural duties attach to the Korean employer regardless of where the investigating team sits.

What HR should do

Phase 1: Immediate response and preliminary assessment

Assess whether the reported conduct could meet the definition in Article 76-2: taking advantage of superiority in rank or relationship, exceeding the appropriate scope of work, and causing physical or mental suffering or deteriorating the work environment [1]. This is a threshold check to scope the investigation not a prejudgment of the outcome. In parallel, ask the affected employee what interim protection they need, such as a change of work location or paid leave. These measures must not be imposed against the employee's wishes [1].

Phase 2: Planning the investigation

Appoint an investigator with no connection to either party an internal HR professional for straightforward cases, or an external expert such as a labor attorney when leadership is involved or impartiality could be questioned. Define the specific allegations, identify witnesses, and set a target timeline so the investigation proceeds without unnecessary delay.

Phase 3: Interviews under strict confidentiality

Interview the complainant first and build a detailed chronology: dates, locations, specific conduct, and supporting evidence such as emails, messages, and recordings. Interview witnesses separately, reminding each of the legal confidentiality duty anyone participating in the investigation is prohibited from divulging what they learn against the affected employee's will [1]. Interview the respondent last, present the specific allegations clearly, and give them a full opportunity to respond with their own evidence. International guidance, including the ILO Violence and Harassment Convention (No. 190), emphasizes safe and confidential reporting and investigation environments as the foundation for accurate testimony [3].

Phase 4: Evaluating evidence and making a determination

Weigh the consistency of statements, corroborating documentary evidence, and context. Avoid importing evidentiary standards from other jurisdictions; focus on whether the objective facts, taken together, support the elements of the Korean definition. Draft a formal investigation report covering the process, evidence reviewed, analysis, and findings, and store it confidentially, separate from ordinary personnel files. SHRM's investigation guidance underscores that a meticulous documentation trail is the employer's primary protection in later disputes [2].

Phase 5: Post-investigation actions

If harassment is confirmed, hear the victim's opinion first, then take necessary measures against the perpetrator discipline, transfer, or other action and provide the victim the measures they request where appropriate [1]. Offer mental health support to the victim, witnesses, and the wider team: the WHO Guidelines on Mental Health at Work recommend organizational and individual support interventions as part of responding to adverse workplace events [4]. Monitor the team afterward; any unfavorable treatment of the reporter or victim is criminally punishable [1].

Investigation checklist

Common mistakes

The most common procedural failures we see in global companies: starting late because the report seemed informal; using an investigator with a reporting-line connection to the accused; interviewing the complainant and respondent together to "hear both sides at once"; applying home-country evidentiary standards or policy definitions instead of the Korean statutory elements; skipping the victim-opinion step before discipline; and circulating investigation details to global HR beyond what the confidentiality duty allows [1].

When EAP support is appropriate

Offer EAP support from the moment the investigation opens. Investigations are stressful for the complainant, the respondent, witnesses, and the team around them, and confidential external counseling  kept fully separate from the investigation record gives everyone a safe support channel without affecting the case. The WHO guidelines identify counseling-based individual interventions as an evidence-based component of workplace mental health support [4]. Managers running an affected team can also use EAP consultation to navigate the period professionally.

Related guides

• Workplace Harassment in Korea: A Practical Guide for Global HR Teams
• Workplace Harassment Report in Korea: HR Response Procedure
• EAP Confidentiality in Korea: Employer and Employee Guide

Frequently asked questions

Should we always use an external investigator? Not always. Internal investigation is acceptable when the investigator is genuinely unconnected to the parties. Use an external expert when executives are involved, the parties dispute impartiality, or the case may escalate to litigation.

How long should the investigation take? The law requires it to proceed "without delay" but sets no fixed deadline [1]. Set a target timeline at the planning stage, document any extensions, and keep the parties informed of progress.

Can the respondent bring a lawyer or colleague to the interview? Korean law does not prescribe interview procedures at this level. Follow your internal policy consistently and document whatever arrangement you allow consistency between the parties is what matters.

What if the complainant refuses to participate further mid-investigation? Continue as far as the available evidence allows, document the circumstances, and keep protective measures and the prohibition on unfavorable treatment in place regardless.

Next step

Run your most recent investigation file against the checklist above and identify gaps investigator independence, documentation, and the victim-opinion step are where most companies fall short. If your organization needs a coordinated approach to employee mental health, manager support, and workplace response, contact Nudge EAP to discuss an implementation model suited to your workforce.

NOTE:

This article is intended for general informational purposes only. Specific legal, medical, clinical, or employment-related matters may require review by an appropriately qualified professional.

 

✨Contact Nudge EAP

Sources

[1] Korea Legislation Research Institute, "Labor Standards Act" (official English translation), Articles 76-2, 76-3, and penalty provisions https://elaw.klri.re.kr/eng_mobile/viewer.do?hseq=59932&type=part&key=40

[2] SHRM, "How to Conduct a Workplace Investigation" https://www.shrm.org/topics-tools/tools/how-to-guides/how-to-conduct-investigation

[3] International Labour Organization, "Violence and Harassment Convention, 2019 (No. 190)" https://normlex.ilo.org/dyn/normlex/en/f?p=NORMLEX_PUB:12100:0::NO::P12100_ILO_CODE:C190

[4] World Health Organization, "Guidelines on Mental Health at Work" https://www.who.int/publications/i/item/9789240053052