A middle school teacher who was suspended for screening a film containing exposure scenes during class filed an administrative lawsuit against the disciplinary action but lost again in the appellate court.
According to the legal community on the 17th, the 1st Administrative Division of the Gwangju High Court (Chief Judge Yang Young-hee) recently dismissed Teacher A's appeal in the appellate trial of the suspension cancellation lawsuit filed against the Gwangju Metropolitan Office of Education. The court upheld the decision that the three-month suspension imposed on Teacher A by the Gwangju Metropolitan Office of Education was justified.
Teacher A, who taught ethics at a middle school in Gwangju, screened the French short film "The Oppressive Majority," which dealt with gender inequality using the "mirroring technique" that reversed gender roles, during the "Sexual Ethics" class from July 2018 to May 2019. The 11-minute film included scenes featuring a woman exposing her upper body and a woman harassing and assaulting a man with a weapon.
Teacher A was also investigated for making remarks during class such as "You should follow me like a colony" and "You feel a strange sensation after having sexual intercourse" while explaining sexual ethics.
After the class, students filed complaints saying they felt sexual disgust, sparking significant controversy inside and outside the education community. Teacher A was even investigated by the police on charges of sexually or emotionally abusing students during class (violation of the Child Welfare Act), but the prosecution decided not to indict due to "insufficient evidence," judging it difficult to consider it child abuse.
However, separate from the investigation, the city education office imposed a three-month suspension on Teacher A for reasons including refusal to separate from students (exclusion from class) after the investigation request, making inappropriate remarks during class, and screening unedited provocative videos. Teacher A filed an administrative lawsuit, claiming that the facts were determined solely based on inconsistent and unclear student statements without considering the overall context of the class, and appealed after losing in the first trial.
The appellate court largely upheld the original judgment. The court stated, "Even if the motivation or intention for screening the video during class was not for personal sexual satisfaction, from the students' perspective, it is an act that can sufficiently cause sexual humiliation or disgust and falls under the category of sexual harassment in a social context or constitutes conduct that damages the credibility as an educational public official," adding, "Even if it occurred during the class process, evaluation or disciplinary action cannot be exempted."
Regarding the problematic film, the court pointed out, "The provocative scenes and subtitle expressions, even considering the video production intent and educational purpose, can cause significant psychological shock to students in their developmental stage," and added, "If it was to be used for class, video editing, subtitle moderation, and prior explanation should have been done."
© The Asia Business Daily(www.asiae.co.kr). All rights reserved.
