Chief Prosecutor Shin Hye-jin, Specialist in Juvenile and School Violence Cases, "Need to Improve Concept Definitions and Handling Procedures to Match Changes in School Violence Cases"

Introduction of Dedicated Investigators, but Teacher and Parent Roles Remain Important
Regulations Needed for 'Cyber School Violence' Platform Providers
Expansion of Restorative Justice Programs Such as Relationship Recovery Programs Required

On the 27th of last month, Shin Hye-jin, Deputy Chief Prosecutor of the Major Economic Crimes Investigation Division at the Seoul Central District Prosecutors' Office in Seocho-dong, Seoul, explained the process of handling school violence cases during an interview with Asia Economy at the Seoul Central District Prosecutors' Office. Photo by Kang Jin-hyung aymsdream@

As school violence continues to show an increasing trend, more sophisticated methods and various types of school violence incidents are occurring. The government began implementing a dedicated school violence investigator system last month, but in the early stages of the system's introduction, confusion in frontline educational settings is inevitable.

Although platform companies have been subject to punishment provisions regarding the distribution of illegal recordings related to sex crimes following the 'Nth Room incident,' regulations on cyber school violence that has moved to metaverse spaces and other platforms are still hard to find.

Shin Hye-jin, chief prosecutor of the Major Economic Crimes Investigation Division at the Seoul Central District Prosecutors' Office and a Level 2 certified specialist in juvenile and school violence known as 'Blue Belt,' emphasized, "We need to redefine the concept of school violence in line with changes in school violence cases and improve the handling procedures and response measures."

On the 27th of last month, we met Chief Prosecutor Shin at the Seoul Central District Prosecutors' Office to discuss the realities of school violence cases and response measures.

Below is a Q&A with Chief Prosecutor Shin.

- What led you to take an interest in juvenile crime and school violence?

▲ From the beginning of my career as a prosecutor, meeting juvenile offenders and their parents and spending hours interviewing them to see their transformation was a great reward that made me forget the fatigue of overtime work. I continued working late into the night every day, and in 2014, I ranked second nationwide among prosecutors in criminal division performance selected by the Supreme Prosecutors' Office. However, my health deteriorated, and I took about a year off for treatment. During this time, I experienced a world falling apart and deeply reflected on my role as a prosecutor, life and death, law, and social systems. Throughout this period, I felt a strong pull toward children and, after deep contemplation, resolved to contribute more as a prosecutor to creating a society where children can live happily. Fortunately, I recovered my health and returned to the prosecution. Believing I needed deeper study of law and society, I began a master's program at the age of 40 and eventually earned a doctoral degree.

- Are there any school violence or juvenile cases you handled personally that stand out in your memory?

▲ During my master's program, I handled cases where students filed counter-lawsuits for defamation and insult, and cases where teachers were sued by parents for defamation during school violence investigations. Through these, I realized that trust among teachers, students, and parents was broken. I could no longer ignore the pain in schools and felt a legal professional's duty to help resolve this confusion through legal system improvements, which led me to prepare my doctoral dissertation in the field of school violence. I also recall a case where high school boys gang-raped a middle school girl, who attempted to end her life by cutting her wrist. All perpetrators were arrested and prosecuted, and the victim received support including plastic surgery and psychiatric counseling. The Crime Victim Support Center actively assisted in her recovery.

- What is the current state of school violence in South Korea? What is the most significant change compared to the past?

▲ Surveys on school violence show a gradual increase in incidents. Often, school violence occurring in schools overlaps with cyber violence. The so-called 'happy slapping' type of school violence, where hitting scenes are filmed and distributed, frequently occurs. Another notable change is that cyber violence is prevalent among students with high to middle academic or socioeconomic status. This is confirmed by statistics. Serious infringements on adolescents' personal rights are occurring, including photo manipulation using deepfake technology, online grooming, verbal abuse, sexual harassment, and bullying in anonymous chat apps like Asked and metaverse spaces.

- What urgent measures do you think are needed to address issues like cyber school violence?

▲ We need to analyze new types of cyber school violence, define concepts that can properly regulate these types, and establish appropriate measures for perpetrators and protections for victims. As I argued in my doctoral dissertation, the responsibility of platform providers must be strengthened. Many countries, such as the EU with its Digital Services Act and Australia with its Online Safety Act, have increased platform providers' responsibilities regarding harmful and illegal content affecting children and adolescents. In South Korea, the Information and Communications Network Act and the Telecommunications Business Act have introduced punishment provisions related to the distribution prevention obligations of information and communication service providers for illegal recordings and sexual exploitation materials, known as the 'Nth Room Prevention Act.' However, there are no proper distribution prevention obligations for harmful information like cyber school violence and sexual harassment that are not subject to criminal punishment. I believe regulations imposing active distribution prevention responsibilities on harmful information affecting youth, with penalties such as fines for violations, should be introduced.

- Last year, there was an incident where a teacher, harassed by parents, took extreme measures. Should we consider that controlling school violence within schools has become more difficult?

▲ It is undoubtedly a very difficult situation with a lack of trust among teachers, students, and parents. However, various systems to restore this trust are being implemented, and I believe schools must take the lead in resolving these issues. Since March 1 this year, under the revised dedicated school violence investigator system, the first investigation is conducted by the dedicated investigator. Even though the investigation procedure has changed, schools and teachers should not leave the investigation and resolution of violence solely to investigators and education support offices. Except for serious cases involving criminal matters, continuous efforts should be made to achieve amicable resolutions. If schools and teachers do not take the lead and become bystanders, controlling school violence within schools will become even more difficult.

- There have been many changes in the school violence case handling procedures starting this year. What are the specific changes?

▲ Last year, there were many incidents such as the 'Jung Soon-shin incident' and the death of a teacher at Seo-i Elementary School. Due to these events, the so-called 'Jung Soon-shin Prevention Act,' an amendment to the School Violence Prevention Act, was passed in October last year and has been in effect since March 1 this year. Following the death of the Seo-i Elementary School teacher, provisions exempting teachers from liability were added to the Child Abuse Punishment Act and the School Violence Prevention Act. Specifically, the clauses state that 'legitimate educational activities and student guidance by teachers are not considered child abuse' and 'when legitimate school violence case handling or student guidance is conducted in compliance with relevant laws and school regulations, the school principal and teachers are not liable for civil or criminal responsibility.' Since standards for the scope of legitimate educational activities and student guidance have not been established, investigative agencies and courts will need to determine these in the future, making the establishment of such standards urgent.

One of the biggest changes is that from March this year, the investigation of school violence, previously conducted by a dedicated body composed of responsible teachers and parents within the school, is now handled by dedicated school violence investigators appointed by the education office. These investigators, who are former police officers or teachers, conduct the first investigation as a principle (if schools and parents request, the dedicated body can still investigate as before). The dedicated body decides whether the school principal can resolve the case autonomously; if not, the case is reviewed by the School Violence Case Review Committee within the School Violence Zero Center at the education support office, which then requests the convening of the School Violence Countermeasure Deliberation Committee based on the investigator's findings.

On the 27th of last month, Shin Hye-jin, Chief Prosecutor of the Major Economic Crime Investigation Division at the Seoul Central District Prosecutors' Office in Seocho-dong, Seoul, was met at the Seoul Central District Prosecutors' Office. Photo by Kang Jin-hyung aymsdream@

- There have been various confusing situations in the field during the early implementation of the dedicated investigator system.

▲ It is expected that dedicated school violence investigators, composed of former police officers and teachers, may find it difficult to interact with today's students. When investigators lacking expertise and experience in school violence investigations conduct investigations without having established rapport (friendly trust relationships) with students, many trial-and-error situations will arise. Students may feel significant pressure, and there may be many cases where teachers become subjects of investigation to secure witness testimonies or circumstantial evidence. Especially nowadays, many students give false statements, and in cyber school violence cases, evidence collection is very difficult. Since investigators with limited school field and investigative experience may not properly conduct investigations and evidence collection, students, parents, and schools must all make greater efforts to promptly collect evidence and secure testimonies from related parties or witnesses.

- Besides the dedicated investigator system, what other changed systems are there?

▲ In the school violence handling procedures, many retributive measures against perpetrators have been established. Upon the victim student's request, emergency measures such as suspension of attendance or class transfer for the perpetrator (Article 17, Paragraph 6 of the School Violence Prevention Act), extension of the perpetrator's school record by four years after suspension, class transfer, or school transfer (Article 22, Paragraph 3 of the Enforcement Rules of the Elementary and Secondary Education Act), and increased penalties for violations of prohibitions on approaching the victim or threatening or retaliating against the victim or reporting students (Article 17, Paragraph 2 of the School Violence Prevention Act) have been introduced. From the time a school violence report is made until measures against the perpetrator are taken, changes in the perpetrator's school status such as withdrawal are prohibited, and when administrative litigation or administrative appeals seek suspension of execution, the opinions of the victim student or guardian must be heard, thereby strengthening protections for victims. Guaranteeing the right to testify is very encouraging, but as victim participation in administrative litigation increases, more school violence cases may ultimately be resolved through judicial rulings.

Also, the suspension of attendance can now be extended until the School Violence Countermeasure Deliberation Committee's review decision (Article 17, Paragraph 7 of the School Violence Prevention Act). However, before the perpetrator and victim are confirmed, there is a risk of unjustly infringing on the learning rights of students accused as perpetrators. Administrative litigation related to school violence has been increasing over the past three years, and these additional retributive measures are expected to further increase such litigation.

- Do you think victim protection measures under the School Violence Prevention Act are properly implemented?

▲ Various victim protection measures have been established, including the victim support assistant system, deletion support for cyber violence-related recordings, voice recordings, personal information, and false information, and prohibitions on contact, threats, and retaliation against victims and reporting students via information and communication networks. However, I believe these victim protection measures alone are insufficient. When a school violence case is recognized, the school principal must immediately separate the perpetrator and victim, which refers to physical separation. Measures to achieve separation in cyber spaces should also be considered. Although there are provisions supporting victims regarding cyber violence recordings, even if deletion is requested from information and communication service providers, it is difficult to recognize rights violations in cases of cyberbullying or sexual harassment within the metaverse, so deletion requests may not be fulfilled in reality.

- Are there additional areas where the system needs improvement?

▲ It is necessary to revise the legal definition of 'school violence' as a criminal offense and amend the law regarding the concept of 'bullying.' As announced by the Ministry of Education, the school principal's autonomous resolution system should be primarily applied to first and second graders in elementary school. Strong measures such as banning perpetrators' use of mobile phones, confiscating phones, and blocking access to relevant sites in cyberspace should be introduced. Additionally, expanding the distribution prevention obligations of information and communication service providers and strengthening their responsibilities are urgently needed. The expansion of restorative programs is also critical, and not only the parents of perpetrators but also those of victims should be included in restorative programs along with enhanced parental education.

- There are calls to lower the age of criminal responsibility for minors under 14. What is your view?

▲ In the United States, the age varies by state from 7 to under 14, and countries recognize criminal responsibility at different ages such as under 10 or under 12. Whether a uniform standard is appropriate or whether detailed criteria beyond biological age should be applied when judging responsibility requires in-depth research on juvenile crime trends, types and characteristics of crimes by minors exempt from punishment, and analysis of juvenile growth and development. Criminal responsibility refers to the ability to distinguish right from wrong and make decisions. Some minors under 14 possess these abilities. Recent cases involving minors exempt from punishment often show they have the capacity to recognize and intend wrongdoing. Therefore, it is inappropriate to judge solely by biological age as a uniform standard.

- Besides retributive measures, what are appropriate solutions in handling school violence cases?

▲ School violence cases are difficult to resolve properly with retributive measures against perpetrators alone. Expanding restorative justice programs and activating dispute mediation can greatly help resolve school violence issues. Currently, restorative programs under the School Violence Prevention Act are mainly operated when the school principal resolves cases autonomously. However, operating restorative programs immediately before or after separating the perpetrator and victim, like Denmark's 36-hour rule (where teachers, victims, perpetrators, and their parents meet and talk within 36 hours), could be an effective way to amicably resolve school violence.

- What are your future plans?

▲ I have a deep sense of vocation in the field of school violence and plan to continue studying and researching. Juvenile crime and school violence relate to our children and are among the most important areas across society, with much to research. I want to conduct broader research through collaboration with education sector researchers and pursue multifaceted system improvements. Besides research, I plan to continue lectures and speaking engagements. I hope that my practical experience as a prosecutor and research as a scholar can contribute even a little to positive changes for juveniles and school environments.

Senior Prosecutor Shin Hye-jin was awarded a doctoral degree (Criminal Law) at the 77th Fall Commencement Ceremony of Seoul National University on August 29, 2023.

◆ About Chief Prosecutor Shin Hye-jin..

She graduated from Myeongdeok Foreign Language High School in Seoul and the Department of Law at Korea University. She passed the 43rd Judicial Examination in 2001 and completed the 33rd Judicial Research and Training Institute. She began her career as a prosecutor at Incheon District Prosecutors' Office in 2004.

She has worked at Seoul Central District Prosecutors' Office, Incheon District Prosecutors' Office Bucheon Branch, Uijeongbu District Prosecutors' Office, and was promoted to deputy chief prosecutor in 2018, serving at Seoul Central District Prosecutors' Office and Seoul Western District Prosecutors' Office. She also served as chief prosecutor of the Criminal Division 4 at Suwon District Prosecutors' Office Ansan Branch and has been working as chief prosecutor of the Major Economic Crimes Investigation Division at Seoul Central District Prosecutors' Office since September last year.

After a long-term study visit to the University of Toronto in Canada in 2012, she wrote a thesis titled "Trends and Countermeasures of Corporate Financial Crimes in the Anglo-American Legal System." In January 2022, she published a paper titled "Overcoming the Limits of Restorative Justice and Harmonizing with Criminal Justice: Focusing on Juvenile Justice" in the Journal of Juvenile Protection published by the Korean Society of Juvenile Policy.

She earned a master's degree in criminal law from the Graduate School of Law at Seoul National University in February 2020 and a doctoral degree in August last year.

Her master's thesis was "A Study on Parental Responsibility in Juvenile Justice: Focusing on Parental Education and Participation," and her doctoral dissertation was "Legal Response Improvement Measures for Cyber School Violence Cases: Focusing on Cyberbullying and Cyber Sexual Violence."

She received a commendation from the Prosecutor General in 2018 for outstanding performance in inspection and audit duties and was certified as a Level 2 certified specialist (Blue Belt) in the field of juvenile and school violence in 2021.

This content was produced with the assistance of AI translation services.