Foreign Mother with Korean Daughter Accused as Child Abuser in Korea [Struggles of Raising Migrant Children]

Petition written by Lee In-hye (alias, 13), a Korean national, appealing for the acquittal of her Mongolian mother (39) on charges of violating the Child Welfare Act (neglect)

"I hope my mother does not get punished."

On July 19th, in a courtroom on the 3rd floor of the Seoul High Court, Lee In-hye (alias, 13), a Korean national, testified as a witness in the appeal trial of her Mongolian mother (39). The prosecution charged the mother with violating the Child Welfare Act, arguing that when In-hye was in the 5th grade of elementary school, she did not attend school for about 30 days, claiming that the mother had "neglected" her daughter's education, and brought the case to criminal trial.

◆ "Discrimination from School to Court"

The mother gave birth to In-hye in 2008 with a Korean man. After their divorce, she raised In-hye alone until she remarried her current Mongolian husband in 2016. They also had a second child.

The mother had conflicts with In-hye’s elementary school homeroom teacher and the school. These issues arose from pointing out her daughter's bullying and educational discrimination at school, as well as during the process of requesting a letter of petition for her husband's visa issuance. In May 2019, mother and daughter submitted an application for experiential learning and left for Mongolia, citing reasons such as "family visa application." The mother was also in a situation where her child-rearing visa (F-6-2) had not been issued since 2018, so she was renewing a short-term general visa (C-3-1).

However, when their stay in Mongolia exceeded the approved period on the application, the school reported the mother for "not sending In-hye to school for about 30 days." In-hye returned and immediately resumed school life when the second semester began.

At the first trial, the homeroom teacher testified that "the defendant came to the school and caused a disturbance," and that "she had a sense of victimization and delusions, once caused a disturbance claiming there were 'rats in the rice' given by the community center. (Mental) treatment was definitely necessary." The presiding judge at the time said, "The defendant is somewhat hostile, right? I wonder why she developed a sense of victimization," and asked, "She was a somewhat uncomfortable parent, right?" Even the defense attorney, who should prioritize the defendant's interests, said, "Communication doesn’t work even with me. She changed lawyers several times."

However, the mother claimed, "I am not mentally ill. The homeroom teacher’s stories about disturbances at the community center are completely unfounded," and "In the first trial, they did not even verify this with me. My request to call In-hye as a witness was also rejected." The fundamental principle of criminal procedure, "when in doubt, favor the defendant," did not function properly. As a result, a guilty verdict with a fine of 5 million won was handed down.

◆ 'Not Guilty' Recognized in Appeal Trial... "Sufficient Reason for Delayed Entry"

The appeal trial was held under the Criminal Division 5 of the Seoul High Court (Chief Judge Seo Seung-ryeol). In-hye, who could not testify in the first trial, pleaded for her mother’s innocence in the appeal trial. The mother appealed, "Koreans say I am hostile if I talk a lot, and stupid if I don’t talk. Please see foreigners as humans, not aliens."

On the 1st of last month, the appeal court ruled that the first trial’s verdict was wrong and acquitted her. The court stated, "The evidence presented by the prosecution does not prove that the defendant neglected the child," and "The defendant continuously showed interest in her child’s education as a biological mother." They noted that during the absence period, the mother sent In-hye to a native English academy in Mongolia and had her complete study materials, and that In-hye also attended international and alternative schools in Korea. It was revealed that even the homeroom teacher had informed the mother that leaving the child alone and going abroad could be considered neglect under the Child Welfare Act.

The court particularly stated that even if the main purpose of the trip was "the entry of the husband and other family members into Korea," it cannot be concluded that this was unrelated to the child’s education. Rather, allowing the entire family to live together in Korea aligns with the fundamental principle of the Child Welfare Act that "children should grow up happily in a stable family environment for complete and harmonious personality development." The court added, "There were sufficiently other reasons that could have delayed the timing of entry."

To the mother who shed tears at the not guilty verdict, the court said, "The court deeply considered the realistic difficulties you expressed," and "We hope you calm your emotions and think positively about our society."

◆ Mother: "This is a Korean Child’s Issue... I Wish the State Were Warmer to Its Own Citizens’ Problems"

The mother, who was acquitted in the appeal trial, told this paper, "I realized that public officials can use manuals to turn people into criminals. It was truly a deliberate report. Because of this, my daughter has not been able to properly receive 'compulsory education' for years." She said, "My child-rearing visa, which was always issued with the same documents, was not issued in 2018, but was issued last year (after the criminal trial). I don’t know why it wasn’t given from the start," and added, "Before, I was told to leave, which caused problems, and in this case, leaving caused problems. I wonder if it’s because I am a foreign mother. If it’s really for the child’s sake, Korea’s laws and systems need to be improved."

The mother added, "I hope Korean society prioritizes 'how children can live happier and better.' The Child Welfare Act also explains that all children should grow up happily without discrimination," and "This is not about foreigners but about its own citizens. Instead of telling me to leave with my Korean daughter, I hope there is a warmer approach to issues concerning its own citizens."

Meanwhile, as the prosecution has appealed the not guilty verdict, the mother will receive a judgment from the Supreme Court.