Investigation into Missing Woman in Jeju Raises Public Safety Concerns

by Kang Min seon Posted : August 24, 2026, 13:52Updated : August 24, 2026, 13:52

The case of a woman missing for an extended period in Jeju has sparked significant controversy regarding the police's initial investigation, leading to heightened public anxiety about safety in the region. Concerns have intensified around the visa-free entry system for foreign tourists, particularly from China, prompting discussions online about whether the safety of South Koreans can be adequately ensured in Jeju.


Public Anxiety Grows Over National Security and Safety

Recently, a netizen referenced a case where a Chinese national allegedly used a South Korean's identity to forge a passport and live in the country for an extended period, questioning, "Is it reasonable that this results in less than a year in prison?" The individual expressed strong fears, stating, "Isn’t this a sign that national security and public safety are in shambles?"


Another user highlighted the alarming number of adult missing person reports in Jeju, noting that there have been 2,914 cases over the past three years and seven months. They remarked, "If a body is not found, it’s just considered a simple missing case. We have no idea how many criminal organizations have entered the country through visa-free entry."


Family of Missing Woman Shares Initial Report Details

On the 23rd, a post titled 'We are the family of Jang Mi-ran' appeared on an online community. The family addressed frequently asked questions regarding the circumstances surrounding the initial missing person report and subsequent developments.


According to the family, Jang's boyfriend filed the first missing person report on May 15. The police officer in charge claimed to have spoken directly with Jang, confirming her safety and stating that she had asked him not to inform her boyfriend of her whereabouts. Trusting this information, the family believed Jang was safe and needed time alone.


However, after a re-report in July, a more thorough investigation began, revealing discrepancies. The family contended that the police had not actually spoken with Jang as claimed.


According to the family's account, the police had confirmed Jang's phone was located near Hallim Port, and while officers were searching the area, they reported a connection with Jang, leading them to halt the search. Subsequent investigations indicated that no actual call had taken place.


Jang is believed to have left home around 1:30 a.m. on May 13 with only her phone. CCTV footage confirmed her departure, but after that, all contact with family and acquaintances ceased. Her phone was found to have been turned off around May 17, and no traces of her activity have been identified through communication, financial, or credit card records.


The family also noted that there were no records of a new phone being activated in her name, nor any records of her using Jeju Airport or departing the island by ferry.


In response to criticism about their actions, the family explained, "We believed the police when they told us Jang was safe and had asked not to be contacted, so we had no choice but to wait, thinking she was okay." They added, "We just want to find her; we are not politically resentful. We only hope this does not end quietly without resolution."


Concerns Raised Over Police Miscommunication

In relation to the case, lawmaker Joo Jin-woo, a former prosecutor, also addressed the situation. On his channel 'Joo Jin-woo's Issue Commentary,' he questioned the police's claim that they had contacted Jang and informed her family she was safe, despite the lack of verification.


Joo asked, "If Jang could contact her family, how did the police know she wouldn’t? The moment she contacts them, the police's lie would be exposed. How could they preemptively lie to the family?" He further criticized, "What does it mean to say, 'Jang has been contacted and is safe,' and then close the missing person case?" He suggested that the police might be complicit in the mishandling of the case, not merely negligent but potentially involved in a cover-up.


Similar Circumstances in Another Missing Person Case Prompt Police Scrutiny

Meanwhile, the controversy surrounding this case intensified on the 23rd when another missing person case was revealed. An officer from the Jeju Western Police Station, who is under suspicion for falsely concluding Jang's case, was found to have similarly closed a case involving a missing man in his 60s, reported missing in July. That man was discovered dead 51 days after the report was filed, and the officer was urgently arrested on charges of neglect of duty and falsifying official records.


The police are continuing their investigation into Jang's case, confirming that the officer had closed the 112 report and ensured the case was not managed in the missing person system. The National Investigation Headquarters visited the Jeju Police Agency on the 23rd to review the handling of missing person cases.


CCTV Footage Deletion Sparks Controversy Over Investigation

Particularly concerning in Jang's case is the revelation that CCTV footage that could have been secured during the initial investigation has been deleted. According to data submitted by independent lawmaker Han Dong-hoon, all footage from 118 CCTV cameras in Hallim-eup, covering the period from May 12 to 20, has been erased. The retention period for this footage was 30 days, and the police only requested access to it 98 days after the presumed date of disappearance.


In Jeju, hundreds of adult missing person reports are filed each year. According to the Jeju Police Agency, there were a total of 2,914 missing person reports for individuals aged 18 and older from 2023 until July of this year, with 15 adults still unaccounted for. Jang has been missing for over three months since her disappearance in May.


Currently, police are continuing their search around Hallim Port, where Jang's last phone signal was detected, while investigating the actions of the officers involved in the initial report and the circumstances surrounding the false conclusion of the case. Jang's exact whereabouts and movements remain unconfirmed.





* This article has been translated by AI.