A first-grade student’s act of pushing a classmate, resulting in injury, does not qualify as school violence, according to a ruling by South Korea's Supreme Court. The court emphasized the need to consider the circumstances surrounding the incident, the relationship between the students, and their ages.
On September 20, the Supreme Court's first division, led by Justice Cheon Dae-yeop, confirmed the lower court's ruling that dismissed a lawsuit filed by student A against the local education office's administrative tribunal regarding a school violence decision.
In March 2023, while attending an after-school program, A was pushed by classmate B in a multipurpose room, causing A to fall and sustain injuries. The local education office's school violence committee determined that the incident constituted school violence and requested a written apology from B. The education office subsequently mandated B to issue the apology.
B then filed an administrative appeal to cancel the written apology order, which the education office's tribunal upheld. A subsequently filed a lawsuit seeking to annul that decision.
The first trial recognized B's actions as school violence and ruled that the decision should be annulled.
However, the second trial overturned this ruling, declaring A the loser. The court stated, "The actions in this case do not reach the level of requiring intervention under the previous school violence prevention law, given that B was only 7 years old at the time. Therefore, the tribunal's decision that this incident does not constitute school violence is not unlawful."
The previous school violence prevention law defines school violence as acts causing physical, mental, or property damage to students occurring inside or outside of school, including injury, assault, confinement, threats, and bullying.
The Supreme Court also noted, "The lower court's judgment did not misinterpret the meaning or requirements of school violence under the previous law, nor did it affect the ruling."
The court further explained that determining whether an act constitutes school violence requires consideration of not only the act's compliance with the legal definition but also the severity of the act, the circumstances surrounding it, and the ages and relationships of the involved students. This comprehensive assessment is essential for balancing the protection of the victim and the need for guidance and education for the perpetrator.
The court emphasized that if all actions causing physical, mental, or property damage are classified as school violence, it could lead to labeling all conflicts or disputes among students as school violence. This could unjustly infringe on the rights and dignity of the accused student, resulting in negative evaluations without a genuine need for intervention.
Additionally, the previous school violence prevention law outlines measures that can be taken against perpetrators, including written apologies, prohibitions on contact with the victim, community service, special education, psychological treatment, suspension, class transfers, and expulsion. The court highlighted the need for careful consideration of such measures, as they could significantly restrict students' freedom to learn.
* This article has been translated by AI.
Copyright ⓒ Aju Press All rights reserved.