Supreme Court Overturns Conviction: Teacher's Reprimand Not Necessarily Child Abuse

The Supreme Court has ruled that inappropriate remarks made by a teacher while disciplining a student cannot be immediately punished as child abuse.

The court ruled that restraining behavior that infringes on teachers' authority and disrupts the learning rights of other students can be considered within the scope of a teacher's disciplinary discretion.

On July 7, the Supreme Court overturned the guilty verdict against a teacher, identified as A, who had been sentenced to a fine of 2 million won in both the first and second trials on charges of violating the Child Welfare Act, and remanded the case to the lower court.

Teacher A, who was working as an elementary school homeroom teacher, did not accept a complaint from a 10-year-old student who failed to complete some items during a performance assessment in June 2019.

The student then talked back loudly, and after class, A referred to the student as a "fraud" and said, "Do not become a child who tells lies like that student. I cannot stand the sight of you."

On the same day, A posted a message on a school communication application, referring to the student, stating, "There is a student who makes up lies convincingly, crying in detail, and acting as if they are unfairly treated."

Later, after receiving a phone call from the student's father, an angry A took the student to the school research office and said, "Your parents were making a scene when you were in kindergarten, too, right? Or rather, they must have made a scene."

A was eventually indicted on charges of violating the Child Welfare Act. The first and second trials recognized all of the teacher's actions as child abuse, ordering a fine of 2 million won and 40 hours of a child abuse treatment program.

However, the Supreme Court's judgment was different.

The Supreme Court determined that while A's behavior was inappropriate and could cause discomfort to the student, it did not constitute emotional abuse to the extent of hindering the child's mental health and development.

The court stated, "A's actions do not appear to have been intended to directly disparage the victim's character."

Reported by Kim Jiuk | Video by Kim Hye-ju | Graphics by Lee Jung-ju | Produced by SBS Digital News
※ Please note: This article was translated by AI and may contain errors.