The Snowballing Restoration Costs of Gyeongbokgung Palace... Parents May Also Be Held Liable

Parents and Guardians Have Duty to Supervise Minors
Liable if Negligence Proven
Need for Private Security Guards at Major Cultural Heritage Sites

With two suspects of the Gyeongbokgung graffiti revealed to be minors, legal circles are observing that their parents could be held liable for the restoration costs. The Cultural Heritage Administration is considering claiming compensation and is also reviewing expanding the scope of cost calculation to include labor costs of the personnel involved.

On the morning of the 16th, the fence in the direction of the National Palace Museum at Gyeongbokgung Palace in Seoul was vandalized with spray graffiti advertising an illegal video sharing site. [Image source=Yonhap News]

Daily Equipment Rental Fee for Restoration 4.5 Million KRW...Cultural Heritage Administration Reviews Claim for Compensation

On the early morning of the 16th, two teenagers sprayed graffiti including phrases like "Free Movie" on the walls around Gyeongbokgung Palace, prompting the Cultural Heritage Administration to begin restoration work. Twenty experts, including preservation specialists from the National Palace Museum and the National Research Institute of Cultural Heritage, are engaged in chemical treatment and laser cleaning operations.

The restoration costs are increasing in proportion to the time required. Currently, the Cultural Heritage Administration is renting three pieces of equipment from the private sector to prevent the paint from seeping into the stone, costing about 4.5 million KRW per day. The Administration is reviewing claims for compensation under the Cultural Heritage Protection Act. A Cultural Heritage Administration official stated, "We are considering how far the costs should be accounted for," adding, "If we include not only the cost of chemicals and equipment rental fees but also the costs related to the personnel involved, the scale could change significantly."

Since the graffiti suspects have been confirmed as minors, the possibility of parental liability for compensation has also been raised. Attorney Kim Yeon-su of Jeonghyang Law Firm explained, "According to precedents, responsibility is generally recognized from age 15 and above, but if it is proven that the parents neglected their supervisory duties, they can also be held liable for compensation," adding, "If the state continues to extend the statute of limitations, collection could be pursued without time restrictions."

Even with Increased CCTV and Patrols, Prevention Difficult... "Consider Stationing Security Guards"

To prevent recurrence, the Cultural Heritage Administration plans to install additional CCTV cameras outside the Gyeongbokgung walls. According to the Administration, a total of 429 CCTV cameras are installed at 209 locations around Gyeongbokgung, but only 14 are installed outside the walls. The Administration intends to add about 20 more CCTV cameras outside the walls to eliminate blind spots.

However, there are criticisms that CCTV alone has limitations. After the first graffiti incident on the 16th, the police increased patrols and stationed officers at key points around major cultural heritage sites in the city, but a copycat crime occurred the next day. Professor Lee Kwang-pyo of the Humanities College at Seowon University said, "It is realistically impossible to perfectly prevent all unexpected incidents," adding, "Increasing CCTV installation is also for post-incident response, and there is no clear preventive method."

There are also calls to select major cultural heritage sites and assign security guards. Professor Park Ji-seon of the Department of Cultural Heritage at Yongin University said, "If major cultural heritage sites are selected comprehensively considering their importance and vulnerability to crime, and security guards are stationed permanently, it would help prevent crimes targeting cultural heritage."

Professor Lee Yun-ho, Chair Professor of Police Science at Korea Cyber University, also explained, "Having security guards physically present on site is excellent in terms of crime prevention effect," adding, "It is possible to consider establishing a system where major cultural heritage sites are selected and continuously guarded through service contracts with private security companies."