The Korea News, Inc.

National Labor Relations Board - Board DecisionsJan 9, 1990

297 N.L.R.B. 537 (N.L.R.B. 1990)

KOREA NEWS 537 The Korea News, Inc. and Byung Ho Chung. Case 29-CA-13461 January 9, 1990 DECISION AND ORDER BY CHAIRMAN STEPHENS AND MEMBERS CRACRAFT AND DEVANEY On Apnl 13, 1989, Administrative Law Judge Raymond P Green issued the attached decision The Respondent filed exceptions and a supporting brief, and the General Counsel filed an answering brief The National Labor Relations Board has delegat- ed its authority in this proceeding to a three- member panel The Board has considered the decision and the record in light of the exceptions and briefs and has decided to affirm the judge's rulings, findmgs, 1 and conclusions2 and to adopt the recommended Order ORDER The National Labor Relations Board adopts the recommended Order of the administrative law judge and orders that the Respondent, The Korea News, Inc. New York, New York, its officers, agents, successors, and assigns, shall take the action set forth in the Order ' The Respondent has excepted to some of the judge's credibility find- ings The Board's established policy is not to overrule an administrative law judge's credibility resolutions unless the clear preponderance of all the relevant evidence convinces us that they are Incorrect Standard Dry Wall Products, 91 NLRB 544 (1950), enfd 188 F 2d 362 (3d Or 1951) We have carefully examined the record and find no basis for reversing the findings In adopting the judge's finding that the Respondent physically re- moved Chung from its premises and threatened him with bodily harm and deportation, we note that the judge implicitly credited Chung rather than K R Ohm and Lee about the events surrounding Chung's presence at the Respondent s facility on December 14, 1987 We correct the following Inadvertent errors in the judge's decision, which do not affect our result in sec I, no union is involved in the present proceeding, in sec II par 10, the Respondent's vice president is Mm Chae Lee, in sec II, par 13, and sec III, par 4, H T Ohm did not concede that he saw (although he testified that he heard about) Chung's leaflet prior to 5 pm on December 11, 1987, in sec II, par 17, Chung was confronted at the door by K R Ohm and Lee, in sec II, par 19, the printing department supervisor was then K R Ohm, and in sec III, fn 5, an employer may maintain a rule against distnbution during work- ing time and in working areas that does not discnminate against union distributions 2 In agreeing with the judge that the Respondent violated Sec 8(aX I) by interrogating employees about their protected concerted activities, Member Cracraft finds It unnecessary to rely on Sunnyvale Medical Clinic, 277 NLRB 1217 (1985) James G Paulson, Esq , for the General Counsel Lloyd Somer, Esq , of New York, New York, for the Re- spondent Edward H Suh, Esq , of Flushing, New York, for the Charging Party DECISION STATEMENT OF THE CASE RAYMOND P GREEN, Administrative Law Judge This case was tried before me in Brooklyn, New York, on various days in December 1988 The charge was filed on March 18, 1988, and the complaint was issued on May 18, 1988 In substance, the complaint alleged 1 That on or about December 8, 1987, Byung Ho Chung with other employees concertedly complained to the Respondent regarding wages, hours, and terms and conditions of employment 2 That in December 1987 the Respondent by various of its supervisors threatened employees with reprisals, and warned and directed its employees to refrain from engaging in protected concerted activity 3 That in December 1987 the Respondent interrogated its employees regarding their protected concerted activi- ties 4 That on December 11, 1987, the Respondent dis- charged Chung because of his protected concerted ac- tivities On the entire record, including my observation of the demeanor of the witnesses, and after considering the briefs filed, I make the following FINDINGS OF FACT I JURISDICTION The Respondent admits and I find that it is an employ- er engaged in commerce within the meaning of Section 2(2), (6), and (7) of the Act and that the Union is a labor organization within the meaning of Section 2(5) of the Act II ALLEGED UNFAIR LABOR PRACTICES The Respondent publishes a Korean language newspa- per called the Korean Times The president of the Com- pany is Andrew Ho Taik Ohm (H T Ohm) The vice president is Mm Chae Lee Byung Ho Chung, the alleged discnmmatee, began his employment at the Company in August 1987 in the print- ing department He remained in the printing department until his termination in December 1987 At the time of his discharge Chung was still a probationary employee, the probation period being 6 months There were four other employees in the printing department which was under the supervision of bureau chief, Ho Keon Ohm In that department, another employee named K C Lim was the assistant to the bureau chief In late November and early December the employees of the printing department held a series of meetings amongst themselves to discuss various grievances that they had This culminated in the signing of a petition by these employees which was left on the desk of the com- pany president, H T Ohm, on December 8 The peti- tion was drafted by Chung and he was the person who 297 NLRB No 77 538 DECISIONS OF THE NATIONAL LABOR RELATIONS BOARD left it in the president's office In pertinent part the peti- tion stated' To our respected president Korea News Inc , as one of the oldest newspaper companies in the eastern region which Koreans op- erate, is proud of its selling the greatest number of copies and of its vigorous external activity Also it gives us pride that we are rewarded with a variety of benefits But we make this proposal because there are points that should be improved We hope that you will seriously consider and handle these matters Last December 5, 1987 the entire staff of the Printing Department had a meeting The pur- pose was the following the atmosphere of the Printing Dept was depressed, each person's dissatis- faction was rampant, and we were of the same opin- ion that we needed a dialogue We are not re- warded with fair pay, the work load is heavy due to a lack of staff, the opinions of ordinary staff are not reflected in the business Therefore, on the afternoon of the 8th, all the or- dinary staff again had a meeting, and decided that we would make a proposal directly to the President of the company by our free will and to the follow- ing particulars 1 Personnel (1) Request for Printing Dept Director's Resig- nation He does not make an effort to understand the business of the Printing Dept, even if time is unnecessary wasted due to the lack of ability of Printing Dept office management The quarters of skilled and technical service that should be a place where peace and happiness pre- vailed to the utmost in the company are warlike due to the Director's curses and his complete ignorance of the ordinary staffs opinions As a result, there were frequent resignations Opinion The Director's resignation should be ex- ecuted by December 12th in order to minimize the damage to the transfer of business and to personal benefits, and as of December 14th, we will work to- gether more faithfully with the new Director of the Printing Dept Unavoidably, in the event that the new appointment of the Director is not executed, a person between the Assistant Director and former Director will execute the business by proxy 2 Reasonable Personnel Director 1, Assistant Director 1, printing 2 (1), electrical transmission 1 (1), plate making 5 persons and 4 parttime persons are the minimum number of transmission 2 Working Environment (1) Working efficiency was lessened because the plate making room was turned into a regular space (2) It can be changed into a pleasant space by the maintenance of a ventilation fan 3 Reward of Proper Pay 'The petition was written in Korean It was subsequently translated Into English during the investigation of the case (1) Besides working hours (40 hours per week), when working overtime, we should be paid 1-1/2 times regular working salary When we are working for others besides this company, we hope that you will provide a working outline and appropriate benefits You must recognize that the Director's resigna- tion is the most important point among the above particulars to be improved, and we expect a satis- factory solution to the rest of the problems on the basis that the Director's resignation will occur with- out fail Upon receipt of the petition, H T Ohm spoke with Vice President Lee and they decided to transfer both the Printing Department Bureau Chief H K Ohm and his assistant Lim to other departments H K Ohm also was given an involuntary 3-week vacation On that same day (December 8), H T Ohm met with the five employees in the printing department He asked them, "You signed this petition ?" When they said yes, he asked what their requests were and who he had to deal with According to H T Ohm, Chung stated that he wrote the petition and stated that H K Ohm could not handle the printing department Ohm testified that he was shocked that Chung, as the junior employee in the department was the one who was making the complaints and was directing his complaints against the older super- visor, who in accordance with Korean tradition is gener- ally accorded respect According to Chung, Ohm at the beginning of the meeting was very angry but as the meeting progressed his mood changed He states that Ohm initially asked why they did not quit if they had complaints, but later stated that he would try to correct most of their com- plaints Ohm also told the employees that he could not fire H K Ohm as he was part of the owner's family On December 9, the new supervisor, Kwang Ryul Ohm, met with the employees in the printing depart- ment According to Chung, K R Ohm told them that the Company intended to resolve the complaints in the petition, that H K Ohm was given a 3-week vacation, and that he and the assistant were being transferred to other departments Chung further states that K R Ohm told the employees that no one would be treated badly because of the petition and that they should talk about it and try to solve the complaints together On December 10, K R Ohm met individually with each of the employees in the printing department Among other things, he told them that they would be paid overtime rates for working overtime, and that they would be given side jobs so they could make more money He also told them that it would take time to fix the ventilation system and that the work area could not be enlarged at that time According to Chung, he told K R Ohm that 2 years was too long to fix the ventila- tion system Chung testified that on December 10 he met with H K Ohm and that Ohm said that although he was leaving for a 3-week vacation, he was not leaving the Company, that he was coming back and then, "We'll see" According to Chung, H K Ohm (referring to the KOREA NEWS 539 petition), added that doing such a thing, would be bad for us According to Chung on December 11, at 3 p m he was called to the office of Min Chae Lin who told him that he was discharged because his application had false- ly stated that he went to a university in Seoul Korea Chung states that he responded that he had attended the school, would provide proof, and refused to accept the discharge Chung states that when he got back to his de- partment (having gotten permission to stay for the re- mainder of the day), he told the other employees about his discharge At some point during the afternoon, Chung wrote up a leaflet which he distributed to em- ployees that day Min Chae Lee testified that on December 11, he re- ceived reports that Chung was going around trying to incite_ other employees about the fact that Printing De- partment Manager Ohm had not resigned even though he had been transferred He also heard that Chung was telling other employees that he had been expelled from Korean Universities for demonstrating Accordingly, Lee states that he asked to have Chung come to his office Lee states that when Chung finally arrived at about 3 p m he asked Chung to explain why, after acceding to many of the demands, he was still trying to instigate the other employees Lee states that he told Chung that he was still in his 6-month probationary period, that the Company had tried to be good to him, but that "we do not need employees who do not cooperate but keep complaining" Regarding the above interview, Lee denies that he told Chung that he was being discharged He does state however, that he told Chung that the Company could not continue to keep his employed if he continued with what he was doing According to Lee, Chung then stated that he had no good reason to fire him As noted above, after the interview between Lee and Chung, the latter prepared a leaflet and also spoke to the employees in his department In part this leaflet, which Company President Ohm acknowledges seeing prior to 5 p m on December 11, stated Above agreements were firmly promised However, the company has been ignoring our requests and re- quested the resignation of one particular employee The company gave a vague reason, such as that the job was not an appropriate job for that individual and another reason was that the individual had listed false information about his education on his resume to the company Because of what had happened, the employees of the printing depart- ment, fearing the continuance of unfair treatments, we hereby make a protest by exercising a tempo- rary work stoppage and demand that the company satisfy all of the demands that it has promised to keep According to Lee about an hour after talking to Chung, be received a call from the printing department reporting that the five employees were about to walk out He states that he and the president of the company went down to the printing department and asked the em- ployees not to leave at this, the busiest time for their work He states that of the group, three decided to stay whereas two, Chung and Oh decided to walk out He states that because of this action, deliveries were delayed and the Company received complaints from some of its customers On Friday evening, , December 11, the Company's management had a meeting and it was decided to dis- charge both Chung and Oh According to H T Ohm (president), the basic reason for their discharge was be- cause they walked out at 5 p m He states that at the meeting there also was a discussion of the fact that both were probationary employees On Saturday December 12, Chung attempted to go to work as usual but was told that he had been discharged and had to leave Chung testified that on Monday December 14, he again went to the Company in an attempt go to work He states that at the front door he was confronted by K Y Ohm and Mm Chae Lee who prevented his entry and who told him that if he continued with this behavior they would revoke his alien registration and cause him to be deported back to Korea According to Chung, he nevertheless entered the building via another entrance and while talking to one of the reporters was confronted by Mm Chae Lee who thereupon physically dragged him downstairs and who said that if Chung continued this behavior, he would kill him With respect to the above Lee testified that on De- cember 14, Chung indicated to him that he wanted to say goodbye to some of the employees and that he got Parks to escort Chung to the printing department He states that when he received reports that Chung was handing out leaflets and trying to incite the other em- ployees, he got angry and after confronting Chung, began to physically force him from the premises He denies that he threatened to kill Chung and states that after the initial contact, Chung went down voluntarily In Sup Ahn testified that sometime after Chung was discharged, he and another, employee Jong Hwan Park, distributed leaflets protesting the discharge He states that he and Park were then called into the office of the printing department supervisor (Ho Keon Ohm) who after asking who distributed the leaflets, got very angry and said that such leaflets should not have been distribut- ed III ANALYSIS Pursuant to Section 7 of the Act, employees are given the right to engage in concerted activities for their mutual aid and protection concomitantly, the employer may not, without violating Section 8(a)(1) of the Act, discharge or otherwise threaten, restrain, or coerce em- ployees because they engage in such activities It is clear to me that the petition prepared by Chung and signed by the other employees in the printing de- partment December 8, constituted protected concerted activity within the meaning of Section 7 of the Act Moreover, even to the extent that the petition, in addi- tion to raising complaints about wages and other terms and conditions of employment, also called for the dis- 540 DECISIONS OF THE NATIONAL LABOR RELATIONS BOARD charge of the departmental supervisor, this did not make the petition unprotected by the Act Thus, although the petition states that the supervisor's "resignation" is the most important point "among the particulars to be im- proved," the fact is that one of the major points of griev- ance amongst these employees was their perception that this supervisor's behavior was intimidating and overbear- ing In Hoytuck Corp, 285 NLRB 904 (1987), the Board stated We agree with the judge that employee Cline's con- duct in preparing and circulating an employee peti- tion which complained of the conduct of the Re- spondent's cook and kitchen supervisor, Whitaker, towards employees and further sought his discharge is protected activity here where it is evident that Whitaker's conduct had an impact on employee working conditions We further note that the find- ing that an employee protest regarding the selection or termination of a supervisor who has an impact on employee working condition is protected is con- sistent with long standing Board precedent [case ci- tations omitted] We wish to make it clear, however, that cases involving employee concerted activity regarding the selection or termination of a supervisor who has an impact on employee working conditions are distinguishable from cases in which employee concerted activity is designed solely to effect or influence charges in management hierar- chy In the latter cases, the Board has found that such conduct does not constitute protected activi- ty 2 In my opinion, Chung was discharged because of his activity in concert with other employees of preparing and delivenng the petition described above In this re- spect, the credible evidence establishes that on the day the petition was delivered to H T Ohm (the Respond- ent's president), the employees were called into his office and told that they should resign instead of writing this kind of petition At the meeting, Chung acknowledged that he was the person who wrote the petition and Ohm testified that he was shocked that the most junior em- ployee was the one who took the lead in making com- plaints and An complaining about a more senior person who was the supervisor 3 Further, the credible evidence establishes that on December 11, Chung was called to the office of Mm Chae Lee at about 3 p m where he was told that he was discharged In this regard, I note that although Lee denies discharging Chung at that time, he did testify that he reminded Chung that he was still in his probationary period and that "we do not need em- ployees who do not cooperate but keep complaining" The Respondent contends that it did not discharge Chung at 3 p m on December 11 but rather that it made the decision to discharge him and Oh because at about 5 p m they walked off the job together at a time when the 2 See also Oakes Machine Corp, 288 NLRB 456 (1988) 3 In Korean culture it apparently would be a gross breach of etiquette for a junior employee to question the authority of an older supervisor For better or worse, American culture is more tolerant of such behavior and this is reflected in American law, which is binding on the parties in this case printing department was at its busiest time As indicated above, I do not credit this assertion Nevertheless even if I did, I would still conclude that the Respondent violat- ed Section 8(a)(1) of the Act by discharging Chung In this regard, the evidence would establish that at that time, Chung and Oh were involved in a work stoppage which was motivated, in part, by the belief that the com- pany had already discharged Chung earlier in the day (Such a belief surely would be warranted in light of Lee's testimony that he told Chung that the Company did not need employees who did not cooperate but kept on complaining ) Thus, the record shows that during the afternoon of December 11, Chung prepared and distrib- uted a leaflet which, among other things, protested his discharge and H T Ohm concedes that he saw this leaf- let prior to 5 p m on December 11 Accordingly, even if it were established that Chung was discharged because he and Oh were involved in a work stoppage on Decem- ber 11, that would of itself be sufficient grounds for de- termining that his discharge was violative of Section 7 of the Act NLRB v Washington Aluminum Co, 370 U S 9 (1962), Dirt Digger, 274 NLRB 1024, 1027 (1985) The Respondent asserted that Chung was a probation- ary employee and therefore was subject to discharge for any reason While I agree that Chung was still in his pro- bationary period, this does not excuse his discharge where it was motivated by illegal considerations North Vernon Forge, 278 NLRB 708, 710 (1986) 4 In addition to my conclusions regarding Chung's dis- charge I also make the following findings 1 I conclude, based on the credited testimony of Chung, that On December 8, the Respondent by H T Ohm impliedly threatened employees with discharge when he suggested that they should quit rather than sign the petition described above Heritage Nursing Home, 269 NLRB 230, 231 (1984) 2 I conclude that on December 11 the Respondent by Mm Chae Lee unlawfully interrogated Chung when he asked why Chung was still trying to instigate the other employees Sunnyvale Medical Clinic,, 277„„NLRB 1217 (1985) However, as I have already concluded that it was during this conversation that Lee discharged Chung, I do not find that Lee separately threatened to discharge him 3 I conclude that on December 14 the Respondent violated the Act when its agents physically removed Chung from the premises, threatened him with bodily harm, and threatened him with deportation Although Respondent would assert that Chung's removal from the premises was justified because he was trespassing, I note that but for his previous unlawful discharge on Decem- ber 11, Chung would have been working at the Compa- ny on the days in question 4 I conclude based on the credited testimony of In Sup Ahn that on or about December 15 the Respondent violated the Act when its agent told Ahn and Park that they should not distribute leaflets to other employees In 4 Inasmuch as the respondent is within the jurisdiction of the National Labor Relations Act, references in its brief, to New York State law and to cases involving airlines (covered under the Railway Labor Act), are inapposite to this proceeding KOREA NEWS 541 my opinion this amounted to the creation of a no-distri- bution rule which was overly broad as it was not limited ,in accordance with the requirements of Essex Internation- al, 211 NLRB 749 (1974) 5 5 I conclude that the Respondent did not violate the Act when H R Ohm told employees that he was leav- ing on a 3-week vacation but that he would be back and then, "We'll see" Even coupled with the statement that making the petition would be bad for the employees, this does not, in my opinion, arise to the level of an unlawful threat In this respect, I note that at the time this state- ment was made, H R Ohm was off on an involuntary leave of absence and had been transferred out of the printing department Under these circumstances, I do not think that the employees involved could reasonably have assumed that this Ohm was speaking on behalf of man- agement CONCLUSIONS OF LAW 1 By discharging Byung Ho Chung because of his protected concerted activity, the Respondent has violat- ed Sectio.i 8(a)(1) of the Act 2 By impliedly threatening employees with discharge if they engage in protected concerted activities, the Re- spondent violated Section 8(a)(1) of the Act 3 By interrogating employees about their protected concerted activities, the Respondent violated Section 8(a)(1) of the Act 4 By physically ejecting Chung from the premises and threatening him with bodily injury, the Respondent vio- lated Section 8(a)(1) of the Act 5 By threatening Chung with deportation, the Re- spondent violated Section 8(a)(1) of the Act 6 By orally promulgating a rule prohibiting distribu- tion of employee leaflets or literature relating to terms and conditions of employment, the Respondent violated Section 8(a)(1) of the Act 7 The aforesaid unfair labor practices affect commerce within the meaning of Section 2(6) and (7) of the Act REMEDY Having found that the Respondent has engaged in cer- tain unfair labor practices, I find that it must be ordered to cease and desist and to take certain affirmative action designed to effectuate the policies of the Act The Respondent having discriminatorily discharged an employee, it must offer him reinstatement and make him whole for any loss of earnings and other benefits, com- puted on a quarterly basis from date of discharge to date of proper offer of reinstatement, less any net interim earnings, as prescribed in F W Woolworth Go, 90 NLRB 289 (1950), plus interest as computed in New Ho- rizons for the Retarded, 283 NLRB 1173 (1987) As many of the employees speak Korean as a first lan- guage, I recommend that the notice be in English and Korean 5 An employer may maintain a rule which prohibits distribution of written materials dunng working hours and in working areas, provided such a rule does discriminate against union distributions Stoddard-Quirk Mfg Co, 138 NLRB 615 (1962) Contrary to the General Counsel, I do not, in the con- text of this case, see any need for a broad remedial order On these findings of fact and conclusions of law and on the entire record, I issue the following recommend- ed6 ORDER The Respondent, The Korea News, Inc , New York, New York, its officers, agents, successors, and assigns, shall 1 Cease and desist from (a) Discharging employees because of their concerted activities for mutual aid and protection (b) Impliedly threatening employees with discharge if they engage in protected concerted activities (c) Interrogating employees about their protected con- certed activities (d) Physically ejecting from the premises or threaten- ing employees with bodily injury because of their pro- tected concerted activities (e) Threatening employees with deportation because of their protected concerted activities (0 Promulgating an overly broad no-distribution rule, prohibiting employee distribution of leaflets and litera- ture relating to their terms and conditions of employ- ment (g) In any like or related manner interfering with, re- straining, or coercing employees in the exercise of the rights guaranteed them by Section 7 of the Act 2 Take the following affirmative action necessary to effectuate the policies of the Act (a) Offer Byung Ho Chung immediate and full rein- statement to his former job or, if that job no longer exists, to a substantially equivalent position, without prej- udice to his seniority or any other rights or privileges previously enjoyed, and make him whole for any loss of earnings and other benefits suffered as a result of the dis- crimination against him in the manner set forth in the remedy section of the decision (b) Remove from its files any reference to the unlawful discharge and notify Chung, in writing that this has been done and that the discharge will not be used against him in any way (c) Preserve and, on request, make available to the Board or its agents for examination and copying, all pay- roll records, social security payment records, timecards, personnel records and reports, and all other records nec- essary to analyze the amount of backpay due under the terms of this Order (d) Post at its facility in New York, New York, copies of the attached notice marked "Appendix " Copies of ° If no exceptions are filed as provided by Sec 102 46 of the Board's Rules and Regulations, the findings, conclusions, and recommended Order shall, as provided in Sec 102 48 of the Rules, be adopted by the Board and all objections to them shall be deemed waived for all pur- poses 7 If this Order is enforced by a judgment of a United States court of appeals, the words in the notice reading Posted by Order of the Nation- al Labor Relations Board shall read 'Posted Pursuant to a Judgment of the United States Court of Appeals Enforcing an Order of the National Labor Relations Board" 542 DECISIONS OF THE NATIONAL LABOR RELATIONS BOARD the notice, on forms provided by the Regional Director for Region 29 after being signed by the Respondent's au- thorized representative, shall be posted by the Respond- ent immediately upon receipt and maintained for 60 con- secutive days in conspicuous places including all places where notices to employees are customarily posted Rea- sonable steps shall be taken by the Respondent to ensure that the notices are not altered, defaced, or covered by any other material (e) Notify the Regional Director in writing within 20 days from the date of this Order what steps the Re- spondent has taken to comply IT IS FURTHER ORDERED that the complaint is dis- missed insofar as it alleges violations of the act not spe- cifically found APPENDIX NOTICE To EMPLOYEES POSTED BY ORDER OF THE NATIONAL LABOR RELATIONS BOARD An Agency of the United States Government The National Labor Relations Board has found that we violated the National Labor Relations Act and has or- dered us to post and abide by this notice Section 7 of the Act gives employees these rights To organize To form, join, or assist any union To bargain collectively through representatives of their own choice To act together for other mutual aid or protec- tion To choose not to engage in any of these protect- ed concerted activities WE WILL NOT discharge or otherwise discriminate against any of you for engaging in concerted activity for mutual aid and protection WE WILL NOT coercively question you about your concerted activities for mutual aid and protection WE WILL NOT impliedly threaten employees with dis- charge if they engage in protected concerted activities WE WILL NOT physically eject from our premises or threaten employees with bodily injury because they engage in protected concerted activities WE WILL NOT threaten employees with deportation because of their protected concerted activities WE WILL NOT promulgate an overly broad no-distribu- tion rule, prohibiting employees from distributing leaflets and literature relating to terms and conditions of employ- ment WE WILL NOT in any like or related manner interfere with, restrain, or coerce employees in the exercise of the rights guaranteed them by Section 7 of the Act WE WILL offer Byung Ho Chung immediate and full reinstatement to his former job or, if that job no longer exists, to a substantially equivalent position, without prej- udice to his seniority or any other rights or privileges previously enjoyed and WE WILL make him whole for any loss earnings and other benefits resulting from his discharge, less any net interim earnings, plus interest WE WILL notify Byung Ho Chung that we have re- moved from our files any reference to his discharge and that the discharge will not be used against him in any way THE KOREA NEWS, INC