A father who was designated as a case management subject by a child protection agency for verbally abusing his children and pressuring them to drop out of school has lost a lawsuit against the local government, claiming his reputation was harmed.
On October 26, the Seoul Administrative Court's Administrative Division 12, led by Judge Kang Jae-won, ruled against Father A in his lawsuit against the head of the Gwanak District Office, seeking to annul the case management designation.
The case began in October of last year when a report of child abuse was filed with the Gwanak Police Station. Following an investigation, the Gwanak District Office decided in January of this year to connect Father A's family with a child protection agency for case management, determining that he had committed physical and emotional abuse by verbally degrading his teenage children and coercing them to drop out of school.
Father A contested this decision, arguing that his disciplinary actions were being distorted and exaggerated.
However, the court found that the district office's determination of abuse and its subsequent actions were lawful. The court noted that Father A had verbally abused his children, calling one a "crazy kid" and using severe profanity towards another, stating, "You little brat, get that spoon over here!" It also acknowledged that his physical punishment, which involved hitting his children's thighs multiple times, exceeded the bounds of acceptable parental discipline and constituted emotional abuse, especially since another child witnessed the incident.
The court further recognized that Father A's actions of coercing or encouraging his middle school-aged children to drop out of school amounted to educational neglect and child abuse, supported by the children's testimonies that they had dropped out due to their father's pressure.
The court stated, "Father A's actions significantly hinder the normal development of his children's physical and mental health," and found no compelling reasons to deem the district office's classification of these actions as physical and emotional abuse as unreasonable by societal standards.
Regarding Father A's claims of defamation and other disadvantages, the court emphasized that the district office was fulfilling its obligation under the Child Welfare Act to provide counseling and education to individuals identified as child abusers. It noted that lighter sanctions are not stipulated by law and are practically difficult to impose.
The court concluded, "Even if this decision results in some disadvantages for Father A, the public interest in ensuring that children are born healthy and grow up happy and safe outweighs any disadvantages he may face."
* This article has been translated by AI.
Copyright ⓒ Aju Press All rights reserved.