[In-Depth Look] Ulryeok and Pumasi

Six years ago, the so-called 'Salt Farm Slave' incident came to light. Disabled individuals were deceived into going to salt farms with promises of good jobs, then forced to work various tasks including salt production for years while being allowed to sleep less than five hours a day, with their wages exploited.

Since then, numerous cases of labor exploitation involving disabled people have occurred. Victims have been exploited for their labor for periods ranging from one year to over 30 years in various places across our society, such as scrap yards, dog breeding farms, zucchini farms, tomato farms, and tire repair shops.

Recently, the so-called cage farming slave incident was revealed. It was reported that a resident of an island village in Tongyeong forced a person with an intellectual disability to work at a cage aquaculture farm for 19 years, subjecting them to assault and wage exploitation. Why do such incidents continue to occur?

The low level of punishment is primarily pointed out. In the salt farm slave case, most defendants received suspended sentences or were sentenced to less than two years in prison.

Among those who received suspended sentences were individuals who forced labor for 14 years, and others who, from the time of their fathers, confined and forced labor on intellectually disabled persons for 21 years across generations.

Attorney Lee Joo-eon (Source: Duroo Corporation website)

Cases of labor exploitation of disabled people involve multiple crimes such as forced labor, wage exploitation, confinement or assault, embezzlement of basic living subsidies, and contract forgery. Therefore, various laws can be applied beyond the Criminal Act, including the Act on Welfare of Persons with Disabilities, the Act on the Prohibition of Discrimination against Persons with Disabilities, the Labor Standards Act, and the Minimum Wage Act. However, investigative agencies sometimes treat these cases simply as wage arrears issues. The severity of sentences handed down by courts can vary depending on how thoroughly investigative agencies review and apply the law.

It is also important to support disabled victims so they can effectively participate in criminal procedures. Support systems such as trusted persons, assistants, statement facilitators, and communication facilitators should be well utilized to help victims properly testify about the facts of the case. Even if victims say they want to return to work or do not wish to seek punishment, the circumstances and the victim’s true intentions must be carefully assessed.

The police have published investigation manuals for cases involving disabled persons, and courts have released judicial support guidelines for disabled individuals. Recently, courts revised these guidelines to include rules that the state covers sign language interpretation costs, reflecting efforts to strengthen judicial support for disabled people. However, the prosecution has created investigation guides for victims by disability type but has not made them public.

There is a need to listen to calls for special legislation that strongly responds to abuse of disabled persons and supports victims, and to supplement laws and systems accordingly. When revising laws, it is necessary to align with the purpose of international norms on the prevention, suppression, and punishment of trafficking in persons (the Palermo Protocol), to which our country is a party. Additionally, laws from the UK and California, USA, which enhance corporate supply chain transparency to prevent forced labor and human trafficking, can serve as references.

There have been cases where the prosecution accepted perpetrators’ claims of ulryeok (working together cooperatively) or pumasi (mutual aid in hard work, repaid in kind) in disabled labor exploitation cases and decided not to prosecute.

It must be understood that for victims, this is not ulryeok but a cause for outrage, and not pumasi but a theft of their lives. Our society’s perception that it is acceptable to treat disabled people carelessly because they were provided shelter and food, or that they should be grateful just for the opportunity to work, must also change.

Lee Joo-eon, Attorney at the nonprofit organization Duru