"Is Digging Up a High Schooler's 30-Year-Old Mistake the Public's Right to Know?" Reporters Who First Covered Jo Jinwoong Accused of Violating Juvenile Act

Accused of Violating Article 70 of the Juvenile Act
"Juvenile Act Is a Social Agreement to Aid Reintegration"

Actor Jo Jinwoong (49, real name Jo Wonjun) has admitted to having a juvenile criminal record and announced his retirement. Meanwhile, the media outlet that first reported this has been accused of violating the Juvenile Act.

Actor Jo Jinwoong. Content Wave

On December 7, attorney Kim Kyungho of Hoin Law Firm announced via his social media that he had filed a complaint against two Dispatch reporters for violating Article 70 of the Juvenile Act, after they were the first to report on Jo Jinwoong’s juvenile criminal record.

On December 5, Dispatch reported that Jo Jinwoong, when he was a second-year high school student in 1994, had been involved in robbery, rape charges, and vehicle theft, and had received juvenile protection measures. Following this, Jo Jinwoong officially announced his retirement. He stated, "I deeply apologize to everyone who believed in and supported me for disappointing you due to my shameful past. I humbly accept all criticism and, as of today, will cease all activities and bring my acting career to an end."

Attorney Kim said, "Society has made the difficult decision to give immature souls a 'second chance.' That is why we enacted the Juvenile Act," adding, "The Juvenile Act is not a shield to cover up crimes, but a social agreement to help individuals return to society without stigma. However, a certain entertainment media outlet recently tore open a sealed verdict from 30 years ago and put it on public display. This is a blatant outrage masquerading as journalism."

He continued, "The media outlet in question listed the robbery and bodily injury charges, as well as Jo's time in a juvenile detention center, claiming they had 'confirmed the criminal record.' But is digging up the mistakes of a high school student from 30 years ago truly necessary for the public’s right to know in 2025?"

Article 70 of the Juvenile Act prohibits relevant agencies from responding to inquiries about juvenile cases. Attorney Kim explained, "This is because the law recognizes that leaking such records can become a weapon that destroys a person’s social life," and pointed out, "If a reporter obtained this prohibited information through a public official or insider, it is not reporting, but a criminal act that illegally breaches the legal protection."

Attorney Kim emphasized, "The core of this case is not 'exposing a famous actor’s past,' but the fact that 'commercial voyeurism' has mocked the rule of law. If forcibly opening doors closed by law for the sake of clicks is tolerated, our society’s correctional system will collapse."

He added, "If a single mistake means being monitored for life, who would ever hope for rehabilitation? Investigative authorities must thoroughly determine how the reporters obtained the information," stressing, "This is not about protecting a particular celebrity, but about sounding the alarm against the misguided media power that seeks to place itself above the law."