Recently, a student from an elementary school in Guri, Gyeonggi Province, was stabbed to death. Severe wounds were found all over her body which was covered in blood. Shortly after, the criminal turned out to be one of her classmates. More surprisingly, the murder was committed impulsively due to the offender’s uncontrollable anger at the rumor that the victim spread. While it is true that the murder was initially triggered by the victim’s careless behavior, it is undeniable that murder is in itself a vicious crime which cannot be justified on any account. So, in the case above, the young offender had to be justly punished according to brutality of the crime. However, the offender was simply put on probation by Juvenile Classification Review Board1, which was a very lenient sentence compared to the seriousness of the crime. As a result, this event became a very controversial issue and now, there is a national petition, demanding for the offender to be re-sentenced. The Sogang Herald delves into the status quo and limitations of juvenile law and explores two opposing positions on it.
Juvenile law regulation upon delinquent teenagers varies depending on age. Chokppeop juvenile2 refers to the law-breaking children whose ages range from 10 to 13. When immature children commit crimes, they are always put on juvenile protective disposition, which implies that they cannot receive a criminal penalty. Teenagers over the age of 13, who did not abide by the law, are classified as “juvenile offenders”. Unlike chokppeop juvenile, juvenile offenders are considered to be intelligent enough to distinguish between right and wrong. Therefore, juvenile offenders can get a criminal trial at which his or her punishment is sentenced less strictly than that of adults. As Chokppeop juvenile, the young offender of the Guri incident, cannot even have a chance to obtain a court judgement, no matter how cruel her crime was. Because of that, many citizens had a negative perspective towards the law, even asserting for its abolition.
Unfairness: Retributive Punishment for Young Offenders
① “Strengthening punishment for young offenders would suggest populism strategy to have the support of the public, but not approaching the delinquency problem directly. A very high percentage of the youth crime was burglary, lighter crime,”
- Japanese Juvenile expert, Senju Masa-Hiro
② “Citing police statistics, about 50% of young offenders are from lower class. According to this figure, the family background and our social structure affect delinquent crimes,”
- Noksaekdang member Shin Ji-ye
The two quotes both emphasize youth offenders’ resocialization. Especially according to Senju, simply reinforcing the penalty for young offenders cannot solve social delinquency issues. As Shin mentioned, 30% of Korean teens living in the reformatory suffered from mental illnesses such as depression, which requires one-on-one counseling for their psychological health. In London, the Youth Offending Team (YOT), an agency specialized for youth individual customized resocialization program, aims to help the offenders raise a sense of responsibility and receives help by inviting staff in charge of mental health or entrusting specialists from other institutions. In case of minor offenses such as theft, young offenders are reprimanded at first offense. However, if they repeat crime, they are sent to YOT. YOT also had speech therapists reside in the slum and work for the improvement of young offenders’ learning difficulty. As a consequence, there was a significant decrease in the number of crimes. To be more specific, there were 3,102 cases of youth offense in 2008; however, this decreased to 890 by 2018. This change shows that Korea also could possibly reduce the number of youth crimes by paying more attention to this problem.
According to Cheon Jong-ho, chief prosecuting attorney who judged a lot of juvenile justice, 95% of youth crimes are crimes for a living such as theft while awful crimes account for less than 1% of all crimes. Young offenders usually do not receive economically independent penalty instead of monetary penalty. If the juvenile law were abolished, youth offenders would receive criminal effect. They are likely to be punished with a fine. Usually, offenders who are not economically independent depend on their parents. As a result, their family have to endure that burden on behalf of the person directly involved. This may not alert the offenders of the seriousness of crime. Rather than abolishment, it is better to leave the law effective in this regard.
Invalid Law: Necessity to Be Abolished
However, neglecting brutal crimes cannot be overlooked, considering the victim’s damage. There was a case which abused the Juvenile law to educate youth offenders rather than punish them. Last year, in an accident which occurred in Incheon, a nine-year-old was killed with her hands cut by two teens. Park, one of the suspects, disguised herself as a middleaged mom and kidnapped the girl playing in the playground alone and carried out her plan. Finishing the plan, she met Kim, a partner in crime at a subway station, sharing part of the kid’s corpse. This implies that their behaviors were planned intentionally. Originally, they should have been imprisoned for life but they are not because they were not of age. The remarkable thing is that they have shown the slightest bit of remorse. The victim’s mother pleaded that the criminals should be charged with heavy penalties so that they can atone and repent for their wrongdoings, complaining of injustice.
A similar accident known as “Kobe province serial murder case” occurred in Japan. The victim’s cut head was hung at the school gate. When it was revealed that the criminal was a middle school student named Shinichi, he was sent to psychiatric hospital without punishment. In response, Japanese citizens insisted for the abolition of the law. Eventually, Japan intensified the law by reducing the age standard and reinforcing the penalty. In fact, the 18-year-old boy that murdered three children had been sentenced to death. However, reinforcing the law couldn’t reduce the rate of crime, which signified that consolidation has less to do with handling fundamental problems. Also, the segment of the juvenile enforcement ordinance does not function well in Korea. As the picture shows, the bigger the Article number is, the stronger the penalty. Article 9 is to be sent to reformatory by compulsion in a short period of time. However, youth offender does not have to serve approximately six months, depending on how well the youth offender has improved. Therefore, it can be a lighter penalty than that of Article 6. Questions may rise regarding why Juvenile law exists. The abolition of juvenile law is in the dilemma.
Trial’s Dualized System
The trials for young offenders are divided into two; a juvenile protection trial and a criminal trial. The first trial’s ultimate aim is reforming young offenders. The aim of criminal trial is to judge how wrong the offender is. It is up to the prosecutor to decide on which trial a young offender will face. Sometimes a criminal trial can be transformed into juvenile protection trial according to circumstances and vice versa. Both cases can cause serious problems.
The young offender who received a criminal trial can be imprisoned before going on a juvenile protection trial. Staying with adult criminals for a maximum of seven months, young offenders can be impacted negatively and possibly repeat crimes. Young offenders who stand a criminal trial first also have a problem. Sookmyung Girl's high school3’s cheating event is an example of that case. The young offenders of that event were twin sisters who attend the school. Twin sister’s father who was former head of the school affairs department of Sookmyung Girl's high school leaked the test information and gave answers to the twin sisters. They had memorized answers for all subjects and wrote the answers down on the exam paper. Even though the sisters could have stood the juvenile protection trial, they were tried at a criminal trial because they did not completely regret their behavior. Prosecutor determined the judgment based on high risk for second conviction and how brutality of the crime was. Sookmyung Girl's high school’s cheating incident is undoubtedly an illegal act in that twin sisters trampled over the value of fairness, which can be considered as a crime. However, it is not a case of murder so it is difficult to determine whether twin’s criminal conduct is included in brutality categories of crimes. These days, the obscure crimes such as Sookmyung Girl's high school’s cheating crime have occurred frequently. The “brutality” is ambiguous to measure and it took more time and cost to choose what kind of trial young offenders would receive first. Regardless of the sequence which trial young offenders stand at first, the introduction of unified trial seems to be needed.
Shortage of Reformatory
The number of reformatories in Korea is also a problem. Japan has 52 reformatories all over the country which means there is at least one reformatory for each countryside. Unlike Japan, Korea has merely ten reformatories, which can inflict mischief against correctional policy. The network between young offenders who stay in reformatories several times can be enlarged on a national basis. Each region should undertake responsibility for children involved. To carry this out, the government should invest in increasing reformatories. Currently, the number of the young offenders’ crimes is on the increase. If the government keeps this situation, reformatories cannot afford to accept the young offenders. Therefore, it seems inevitable for the government to stretch a budget in terms of young offenders.
The Ongoing Juvenile’s law
An endless debate is expected upon the abolition of juvenile law. As crimes became more and more cruel, many people agreed on abolition but they often tend to concentrate on brutal events. They should not evaluate juvenile law without knowing the exact details. However, chokppeop law needs to be revised. Chokppeop juveniles have been protected from criminal trials even though they committed a brutal crime unlike a juvenile offender. Chokppeop juveniles are based on man4 age. Therefore, if the same aged young offenders commit the same crime, the penalty can be different based on whether the birthday is over or not. In other words, while one can be protected, the other can be punished with a criminal trial and the criminal record can be left. As seen in case of Guri, children’s crime became more atrocious, so chokppeop penalty should be extended from mere “protection”. However, juvenile law in itself was created with good intentions in terms of rehabilitation and resocialization. Therefore, identifying the weaknesses of the law and making up for it, such as increasing the budget for young offenders’ resocialization, should be prioritized, rather than abolishing the law.
By Choi Jin-young (Int’I&Social Reporter)
jewelryjin0@sogang.ac.kr
