1. The Client’s Crisis

The client’s child (upper elementary school grades) was an ordinary child with an outgoing personality who liked playing with friends. However, after it was revealed that some students in the same group had teased a particular student and taken and thrown away the student’s belongings, a total of six students, including the client’s child, were reported for school violence. The client’s child had only belonged to the same group and had never actively participated in the bullying, but the victim student’s parent treated all of them as accomplices and requested that the School Violence Committee be convened. As the matter, which had been thought to end with teacher guidance, escalated to a school violence committee, the guardian came to Law Firm Jeonje because the child’s admission to an international middle school was now at risk.

2. Key Issues

First, the School Violence Committee had already been convened. Once the committee is opened, decisions can range from 'no action' to expulsion, and once referred, there was a high likelihood that some form of measure would be imposed. Second, because the victim’s side had reported all six students as equally responsible, it was necessary to individually prove that the client’s child had a different role from the others. Third, if a 'measure' were imposed as the result of the committee, it could directly affect admissions to an international middle school, so it was essential to obtain 'no action'.

3. Jeonje’s Strategy

Attorney Shin Mi-jin, after taking the case, formed a juvenile response team and began handling the matter. The six reported children had each retained different lawyers, and the key was to establish a defense theory that distinguished the client’s child from the others.

First, while it was true that the client’s child belonged to the group, we organized specific evidence showing that the child did not actively participate in the bullying. At the same time, we presented concrete points such as how deeply the child regretted hurting a friend, the family’s commitment to guiding the child, and the child’s age and future plans in order to persuade the review committee.

4. Outcome and Recovery

The School Violence Committee issued a 'no action' decision only for the client’s child handled by Law Firm Jeonje among the six reported students. In criminal terms, this is the practical equivalent of a 'no suspicion' disposition. The client’s child was able to prepare for admissions to an international middle school without any school violence measure on record.

Attorney in charge: Attorney Shin Mi-jin (Specialist in juvenile cases, member of the Juvenile Response Team)

To protect confidentiality, this case has been partially de-identified to the extent that it does not undermine the essence of the matter.