Quick access to top menu Direct access to main contents Quick access to page bottom

Supreme Court Rejects Secret Recordings as Evidence in Child Abuse Cases

It has been ruled that secretly recorded teacher’s remarks cannot be used as legal evidence.

On the 11th, the Supreme Court’s First Division overturned the original judgment that fined elementary school teacher 5 million won (approx. US$3,800) for violating the Child Abuse Punishment Act and sent the case back to the Seoul Eastern District Court.

This teacher was charged with verbally abusing a third-grade student whom she was in charge of from March to May 2018, saying things like “you act like you haven’t been to school” 16 times.

The student’s mother, suspecting child abuse, secretly put a recorder in her child’s bag to record the class and submitted this as evidence to the police.

The issue in the trial was whether the ‘secretly recorded’ material could be accepted as evidence.

Picture to help understand the article / ninefotostudio-Shutterstock.com

The first and second courts recognized the evidentiary power of the recorded file and found the teacher guilty, but the Supreme Court disagreed.

The Supreme Court explained, “The defendant’s remarks during class, which were secretly recorded by the victim’s parents, fall under ‘non-public conversations,’ and this recording is denied evidentiary power according to the Telecommunications Privacy Protection Act.”

It is noteworthy whether the Supreme Court’s decision will affect similar cases.

The “Ju Ho-min case,” which attracted social attention, is an example.

Webtoon writer Ju Ho-min and his wife filed a complaint against a special education teacher, who was teaching their developmentally disabled son, on charges of child abuse last September.

It was revealed that Ju Ho-min’s wife secretly put a recorder in her child’s bag and recorded the class.

(From left) Webtoon writer Kim Pung, Ju Ho-min / News1

The original recording file, about 4 hours long, was released at the 4th trial on November 27 last year.

At the 5th trial, a dedicated public official C from the Yongin City Hall Child Abuse Department testified as a witness, stating that “the case was judged as emotional abuse by the teacher” and “I heard about 5 minutes of the recorded content.”

The next date for this trial is the 15th.

+1
0
+1
0
+1
0
+1
0
+1
0
wikitree's Profile image

Comments0

300

Comments0

Share it on