Ministry of Education: "Investigation into Teacher Bullying by Officer Likely to Take Time... Some Related Parties Unreachable"

Visiting Child's School for Principal Meeting, Changing Homeroom Teacher
Providing 'Solution' to New Homeroom Teacher
Suspension Lifted Due to No Child Abuse Charges

The Ministry of Education stated that regarding the allegations that a ministry official abused power over their child's elementary school homeroom teacher, "Although we initially planned to resolve the matter within this week, it may take a little longer."

At a regular briefing held at the Government Sejong Complex on the 14th, a Ministry of Education official said about the audit targeting official A, "We are investigating as quickly as possible, but some of the related parties are unreachable."

According to the key developments disclosed by the Ministry of Education, on October 17 last year, homeroom teacher B of official A's child reportedly had the class students write about the "good points" and "bad points" of A's child. When the writings by the students were posted by B on the "School Bell Notification App," A protested to the school, resulting in the post being deleted. Subsequently, on October 17-18, A visited the school their child attends and met with the principal, demanding a change of homeroom teacher. Following this, B submitted a resignation from the homeroom teacher position, and the homeroom teacher was changed.

Additionally, around October 19-21, A reported homeroom teacher B of their elementary school child to the police station and local government offices on charges of child abuse. Furthermore, A requested a fact-finding investigation and strict punishment against B through the Sejong City Office of Education's National Petition Board. After the report, A delivered their child's information and nine solutions to the current homeroom teacher C during working hours.

[Image source=Yonhap News]

On November 9 last year, the Sejong City Office of Education suspended B from their position. On December 9, the following month, Sejong City government judged B to have committed child abuse. However, later, a whistleblower reported allegations of abuse of power against C to the National Petition Board, and in February this year, the Ministry of Education's Teacher Appeal Review Committee decided to cancel the suspension of former homeroom teacher B. Subsequently, in May, the Daejeon District Prosecutors' Office also decided not to indict B for child abuse violations.

This month, A's abuse of power and defamation were reported to the Office for Government Policy Coordination, which forwarded the matter to the Ministry of Education. An audit was then conducted, and a request was made to suspend A from their position.

Regarding this, a Ministry of Education official said, "We will check whether there were efforts to reconcile and mediate not only with the former and current homeroom teachers but also with the administrators involved."

Regarding the prolonged investigation process, the official said, "Initially, we intended to limit the scope of the investigation and handle the results quickly, but as the investigation proceeded, the number of related parties increased, which may prolong the process. We are listening to testimonies from related parties about the efforts made with the homeroom teachers, so it is difficult to provide a clear statement."

The Ministry of Education stated that after receiving a report in December last year, they conducted an investigation and issued a verbal warning to A. They also explained that while forming an investigation team after receiving a report this month, the issue became public through the media.

A Ministry of Education official said, "At the time of the audit after the report was received in December last year, Sejong City government had judged it as child abuse, but following the administrative trial result by the Central Administrative Appeals Commission on July 11, the judgment changed to 'not child abuse' regarding B's actions as judged by Sejong City government. We need to ascertain the basis of this ruling."