Juvenile School Violence Defense Case | Revocation of a Disciplinary Action Against a Juvenile Subjected to a School Violence Disciplinary Action

The victim student claimed that the client and other friends had mocked the student and repeatedly ridiculed the student, and reported several students for school violence.

During the subsequent investigation, the client truthfully stated that the client had never engaged in bullying, but the client nonetheless received a disciplinary action from the School Violence Committee.

In response, the client came to Daeryun together with the client's parents and, appealing to a sense of injustice, stated, "I never engaged in bullying, and I was not even part of the group that did the bullying," and requested assistance with a lawsuit to revoke the disposition.

The attorney specializing in school violence reviewed the possibility that, if the School Violence Committee's disposition were executed immediately, the client could suffer irreparable disadvantages such as effects on the client's academic grades and the entry in the student record.

Accordingly, separately from the lawsuit to revoke the disposition, the attorney filed an application for a stay of execution and specifically substantiated to the court a request to suspend the effect of the disposition until the judgment on the merits.

In that process, the attorney emphasized the necessity of a stay of execution on the basis that there were procedural problems with the School Violence Committee's disposition and a dispute as to the facts.

The attorney specializing in school violence focused on and closely reviewed the circumstances in which the victim student, in the initial statement, identified several students other than the client as perpetrators, and then later changed the statement to 'all of them' in the course of specifying the perpetrating students.

After comparing and organizing the times at which the statements were made, the content of the questions asked at those times, and the manner of expression used, the attorney pointed out that the client had been included while the victim student was unable to clearly identify the perpetrators.

On this basis, the attorney constructed the possibility of a mistake in the victim student's memory and the lack of consistency in the statements as key issues and reflected them in the lawsuit.

The attorney specializing in school violence secured the written statements of all the reported students and cross-reviewed each item of their content.

As a result, the attorney systematically established that there was no statement at all to the effect that the client's name was mentioned or that the client had taken part in the harmful conduct.

On this basis, the attorney pointed out that the School Violence Committee had judged the client to be a perpetrator without objective evidence and argued that the disposition was unlawful.

A school violence disciplinary action does not stop at simple guidance on conduct, but, through the entry in the student record, can have a direct impact on university admission and future career paths.

In particular, because a record of a school violence measure has recently often been reflected as an important evaluation factor in the university admissions process, the initial response and the management of the severity of the disposition are more important than anything else.

As with the client in the above case, where one objects to a measure of the School Violence Countermeasures Deliberation Committee, one can contest the unlawfulness or impropriety of the disposition through an administrative appeal or an administrative lawsuit.

Both an administrative appeal and an administrative lawsuit have strictly defined filing periods, and missing them limits the very opportunity to contest the disposition.

In addition, because a separate application for a stay of execution is required in order to immediately halt the effect of the disposition, a prompt legal response from the initial stage is important.