The Case of General Park Jeong-taek and the Abuse of Power and Ethical Collapse of Military Generals

Introduction – An Unprecedented Incident Shaking the Honor of the Military

In 2025, an unprecedented and serious ethics violation occurred within the Republic of Korea's military. Major General Park Jeong-taek, who leads the Capital Defense Command, a key unit responsible for defending the metropolitan area, was found to have committed habitual "abuse of power" along with driving under the influence while under disciplinary action. Major General Park is a rare three-star general in the army, known for his operational capability and leadership as a senior figure. However, this incident has shaken the foundations of military ethics and caused significant trust erosion across the organization. The case of Major General Park Jeong-taek cannot simply be dismissed as an individual's deviation. It highlights how far the authority of high-ranking generals can expand within an authority and hierarchy-centered military organization, while also starkly revealing the limitations of the monitoring system and internal control mechanisms. This essay will examine the abuse of power, organizational ethics, institutional blind spots, and the need for societal and institutional responses, focusing on the Park General incident.

Main Point 1 - Repeated Private Work Instructions and Habitual Bullying

The allegations of "habitual abuse of power" against Major General Park Jeong-taek first came to light in the first half of 2025, thanks to a tip-off from the military human rights center. According to the report, he has repeatedly instructed subordinate military personnel, including those in the secretariat and drivers, to perform personal tasks over an extended period. These instructions consisted of personal requests that had nothing to do with the soldiers' primary duties. Notable examples include having a soldier stand in line for his spouse's swimming pool registration, arranging for designated drivers and checking guest numbers for his child's wedding preparations, transporting items to his home, pet care, acting as an intermediary for second-hand transactions, and requesting the purchase of professional baseball tickets. Furthermore, some soldiers had to carry out these "errands" even during holidays or outside of working hours, and they expressed that they had no choice but to comply due to fears of potential personnel disadvantages if they refused or raised issues. These directives were not isolated incidents but occurred continuously over approximately a year, with soldiers effectively having to act as "personal aides" during their military service. In response, the Army conducted an inspection investigation, and on June 17, 2025, it announced that a significant portion of the actions directed by Major General Park had been confirmed as factual. Based on the investigation results, the military imposed a severe penalty of three months of suspension on Major General Park, who was currently undergoing the disciplinary action while being removed from his position as the capital corps commander. This incident symbolically illustrated the serious harm that can occur to organizational members when a senior officer's personal authority is exercised unchecked within a military organization. Additionally, it revealed that the "abuse culture" within the military still persists, highlighting the absence of a monitoring system that could institutionally prevent such behavior.

Main Point 2 - Driving Under the Influence Detected During Probation

The controversy surrounding Major General Park Jeong-taek did not stop here. While he was excluded from his duties due to a suspension, he committed another serious misconduct. On June 28, 2025, around 10:20 PM, Major General Park, who was driving his personal vehicle in the Jeongnam-myeon area of Hwaseong, Gyeonggi-do, was caught by the police on suspicion of drunk driving following a citizen's report. The blood alcohol concentration measured at the time was at a level that warrants a driver's license suspension (0.03-0.08%), and there were no passengers in the vehicle. Although he was excluded from official military duties due to the suspension, he was still obligated to maintain military ethics as an active-duty three-star general. Nevertheless, by choosing to drive after drinking, he showed that he failed to uphold even the minimum moral standards expected of a high-ranking military official. After the incident was confirmed by the police on site, the case was transferred to military investigative authorities due to the fact that the suspect was an active-duty soldier. Unlike civilian drunk driving cases, the drunk driving of active-duty soldiers follows military legal procedures, which can entail both disciplinary actions and criminal responsibility. The fact that Major General Park committed another violation of regulations after already receiving significant disciplinary action constitutes a serious ethical and legal double violation, regarded as a matter that undermines military discipline from its roots. Furthermore, this incident reveals that the disciplined individual was free from monitoring and control even during the period of suspension, and the absence of a post-discipline management system is also facing criticism.

Main Point 3 - Institutional Blind Spots and Ineligibility for Active Duty Service Review

The institutional gaps within the military revealed by this incident go beyond just the personal misconduct of General Park. Firstly, the lack of a systematic monitoring system for the character and abuse of power among senior military officials is a key issue. Despite the clear violation of regulations, the type of coercion involving personal tasks directed at the staff has gone undetected for a long time, and there are indications that internal complaints were disregarded or ignored. Furthermore, even after the disciplinary action was finalized, General Park continued to engage freely in social activities, even committing drunk driving, demonstrating that the management system for those under discipline is functioning merely in a formal sense. Currently, the military allows for a 'service unfitness review' for senior officials who have received severe punishments of suspension or more. This is a procedure that makes forced discharge possible if deemed unfit for military service. General Park has already received a suspension for habitual bullying, and with the additional finding of drunk driving, he is highly likely to be subject to a service unfitness review. Depending on the outcome of this review, he may end his military career and be discharged. However, there are also criticisms regarding the effectiveness and objectivity of this review system, as well as the lack of transparency concerning the criteria for linking punishment and discharge. Ultimately, the conclusion is reached that the higher the rank of the official, the greater the potential for abuse of power, making the independence of oversight bodies and the substantive enhancement of soldier protection systems essential.

Conclusion - Ethics that should take precedence over authority

The military is an organization that values hierarchy and order. However, that authority can only be maintained on the basis of the voluntary trust of its members and ethical leadership. The case of Major General Park Jeong-taek starkly illustrates the consequences that arise when authority is exercised over ethics. A senior officer reducing subordinates to personal errand runners and violating laws even during the disciplinary period ultimately led to distrust towards the military as a whole from the public. It is now necessary to demand institutional changes beyond mere disciplinary actions. First, the procedures for personality verification and inspection cycles for senior officers should be strengthened. Second, a reporting system and victim protection framework that can effectively prevent abuse of power in the relationship between soldiers and officers must be established. Third, a post-management system that allows for the tracking and monitoring of individuals' behavior even after disciplinary actions should be introduced. The military is an organization that protects the lives and safety of the people. Therefore, moral corruption of senior officials should not be tolerated for any reason. Those in positions of authority are expected to adhere to higher ethical standards, and when that ethical responsibility falters, the very reason for the military's existence comes into question. The major general Park Jeong-taek case serves as a strong warning of this reality. This incident should not be the end but rather the starting point for institutional improvement.