1. The Client’s Crisis

After being investigated for the crime of taking images using a camera, etc. (violation of the Act on Special Cases Concerning the Punishment, etc. of Sexual Crimes), juvenile A was transferred to the Family Court. The problem was that a hearing date was scheduled immediately after the transfer to the Family Court. In juvenile trial practice, when a date is set right after transfer, it usually signals a serious situation in which referral to a juvenile classification and inspection center is expected at the first hearing. In addition, at the investigative stage, A had not shown sufficient remorse, and no apology to the victim or settlement had been reached. The guardian urgently came to Law Firm Jonjae.

2. Key Issues

The difficulties in this case were largely threefold. First, the initial response at the investigative agency had been wrong. A’s conduct of facing the investigation without remorse was left on record, and this was inevitably a factor that could negatively affect the court’s judgment. Second, because the hearing date was set immediately after the case was transferred to the Family Court, the time available to prepare a defense against referral to the juvenile classification and inspection center was extremely tight. Third, no apology had been conveyed to the victim and no settlement had been reached at all. In a camera-filming case, proceeding to trial without a settlement with the victim decisively works against the court’s impression of the case.

3. Jonjae’s Strategy

Attorney Shin Mi-jin immediately recognized the seriousness of the case after the consultation and began responding at once.

First, after making clear to A and the guardian that the response during the investigation had been wrong, she held a long interview with the juvenile to bring out genuine remorse. Afterwards, she conveyed to the victim the juvenile’s sincere remorse and desire to apologize, and the victim accepted the apology, resulting in a civil settlement as well.

At the same time, three lines of preparation were designed for trial. A and the guardian were made to complete counseling and sex education, and voluntary service activities were arranged so that the juvenile could demonstrate genuine remorse through actions. Materials necessary to persuade the court, such as records of completed counseling, volunteer activity details, letters of remorse, and petitions, were thoroughly prepared and submitted.

4. Result and Recovery

At the hearing, the presiding judge stated, "At first I was considering referral to the center," but after confirming the juvenile’s sincere remorse and the guardian’s genuine supervision plan in the submitted materials, decided not to order referral to the center. A received Dispositions Nos. 1 and 4 (guardian supervision + short-term protective probation) and was able to return home with the guardian. This was the result of successfully defending against the worst-case scenario of referral to the juvenile classification and inspection center while also reaching a civil settlement with the victim.

Attorney in Charge: Attorney Shin Mi-jin (specialist in juvenile cases, affiliated with the Juvenile Protection Center)

This case has been partially de-identified to protect confidentiality, within a scope that does not undermine the essence of the case.