Why the 'Teacher Protection Bureau' in the Drama 'True Education' Is Hard to Realize in Reality

-Legal column by Na Eun-jeong, attorney at Daeryun LLC (Limited)

As the problems of teaching-authority infringement and school violence recently become a social controversy, voices demanding a stronger response system are growing. Amid this atmosphere, the Netflix drama 'True Education' is gaining public sympathy by satisfyingly punishing problems that are not solved by existing systems. The 'Teacher Protection Bureau' in the work, backed by mighty authority, immediately sanctions school-violence perpetrators and malicious complaint-filing parents. Because it is a resolution method rarely seen in reality, it delivers strong catharsis, but the law in reality operates on an entirely different principle from the drama.

The 'Woo-jin's Mother' episode in the work symbolically shows today's teaching-authority infringement problem. Repeatedly contacting a teacher's personal phone number, filing complaints taking issue with legitimate guidance, or suing a teacher for emotional child abuse are realities not unfamiliar in actual educational settings. However, unlike the organization in the work that immediately confirms responsibility and imposes sanctions on the spot, in reality no one is permitted such authority.

The point where the drama and reality most greatly diverge is precisely the manner of confirming the facts. In reality, school violence cases are not few in which good and evil are not clearly distinguished. In particular, since harassment through group chat rooms or SNS occurs covertly, the facts are judged by synthesizing various materials such as KakaoTalk conversations, posts, transcripts, counseling records, medical certificates, and statements of people around them. The very reason not a few cases in actual practice escalate into administrative litigation or into civil and criminal disputes in objection to a school violence measure is precisely that disputes over the facts of the case continue in this way.

For this reason, in reality school violence cases inevitably proceed according to the complex procedures set by law. A school dedicated body or dedicated investigator investigates the facts, and the dedicated body deliberates whether the principal can resolve it independently. Thereafter, if the matter does not meet the requirements for principal-led resolution due to its nature, or the victim student's side does not consent to principal-led resolution, the education support office's School Violence Countermeasures Deliberation Committee deliberates and resolves whether it constitutes school violence and the measures for the victim and offending students, and the superintendent imposes measures based on the committee's decision. If one objects to the measure, it may lead to an administrative appeal or administrative litigation. In some cases, a civil damages claim or criminal proceedings proceed in parallel. Although the procedure may feel long and complex, this is a device to guarantee sufficient opportunities to state opinions to the perpetrator, victim, and teacher alike, and to confirm the facts objectively. This is precisely why the law prioritizes procedural legitimacy over speed.

At its basic foundation lies the fact that the Constitution requires due process as a basic principle of the exercise of state power. Article 12 of the Constitution stipulates the due process principle, and Article 37, Paragraph 2 also provides that to restrict citizens' freedom and rights, there must be a legal basis and the essential content cannot be infringed. Since students and parents are also subjects of constitutional basic rights, a structure in which a particular agency immediately imposes sanctions without fact confirmation and a guarantee of the right of defense is highly likely to conflict with the constitutional principle of protecting basic rights. Ultimately, the issue is not the very existence of an organization called the Teacher Protection Bureau, but how one designs which authority is exercised through which procedure.

Systems to protect teachers are also already in place. Under the Special Act on the Improvement of Teachers' Status and the Protection of Educational Activities, a Teaching Authority Protection Committee is operated, and for the victim teacher, psychological counseling and advice, treatment and recuperation for treatment, and other measures necessary for healing and recovery of teaching authority must be provided. In addition, if the competent authority judges that an act infringing educational activity falls under the criminal punishment provisions of the relevant statutes, it can report the actor to the competent investigative agency. Nevertheless, the reason the Teacher Protection Bureau in the drama gains great response is not that the systems do not exist, but that many people feel the speed and effectiveness of protection experienced in the field are still insufficient.

Ultimately, the question 'True Education' poses is not simply whether to create a Teacher Protection Bureau. The real task lies not in newly establishing an organization endowed with exceptional authority as in the drama, but in improving the existing procedures so that they operate swiftly yet fairly and effectively. We must not forget that what substantively protects teachers and students in school violence and teaching-authority infringement cases is not mighty authority itself, but faithful confirmation of the facts, judgment based on objective evidence, and the fair and effective procedures that support them.

Reporter Lee Dong-o (canon35@mt.co.kr)

[Read Full Article]
Why the 'Teacher Protection Bureau' in the Drama 'True Education' Is Hard to Realize in Reality (Go to Article)