Accused of Violating the Juvenile Act
"Need to Clarify How Information Was Obtained"
Two reporters from Dispatch who reported on Jo Jinwoong's juvenile delinquency record have been accused of violating the Juvenile Act.
Attorney Kim Kyungho of Hoin Law Firm announced on the 7th that he had filed a complaint against two Dispatch reporters through the National Petition Portal, accusing them of violating Article 70 of the Juvenile Act. Kim previously served as the legal representative for former Marine Corps Investigation Unit Chief Park Junghoon.
Article 70 of the Juvenile Act stipulates that, except in cases necessary for trial, investigation, or military purposes, agencies involved in juvenile protection cases must not respond to any inquiries. Violation of this provision can result in up to one year of imprisonment or a fine of up to 10 million won.
Attorney Kim stated, "They tore open a sealed verdict from 30 years ago and put it on public display," calling it "an obvious outrage disguised as journalism." He added, "If the reporters obtained prohibited information through public officials or internal contacts, this constitutes not reporting but a criminal act that illegally breached the legal protection provided by law."
The complaint also included specific legal grounds. Attorney Kim argued, "The details reported by Dispatch, such as the charges of robbery resulting in injury and the juvenile detention record, are sensitive personal information not disclosed to the public," and pointed out, "It is problematic that an unidentified public official affiliated with a juvenile protection agency responded to the reporters’ request, accessed the case records, and leaked the contents."
He continued, "While the reporters may not be the direct offenders, they could still be subject to punishment under the legal principles of joint principal offenders (Article 30 of the Criminal Act) or instigators (Article 31 of the Criminal Act), as they persistently requested case inquiries or confirmations from the responsible officials under the pretext of reporting."
He further emphasized, "Even though freedom of the press and the public's right to know are constitutionally guaranteed rights, it cannot be justified to illegally obtain and disclose confidential information that is explicitly prohibited by law."
He also questioned, "Is it truly an essential 'right to know' to bring up the mistakes of a high school student from 30 years ago before the public in 2025?" He argued, "The essence of this case is not the 'exposure of a famous actor's past,' but that 'commercial voyeurism' has mocked the rule of law."
Additionally, he stated, "If acts of forcibly opening doors closed by law for the sake of clicks are tolerated, our society's correctional system will collapse," and added, "If a single mistake leads to a lifetime of surveillance, who would ever hope for rehabilitation?"
In the complaint, Attorney Kim demanded, "Investigative authorities must thoroughly investigate how the reporters obtained the juvenile protection case records from 1994," and called for "identifying the unnamed internal accomplice through communication records checks or search and seizure."
Previously, on the 6th, he posted a column on his social media titled, "South Korea in 2020 Sent Jean Valjean Back to Prison." In the column, he defended Jo Jinwoong, stating, "Just as Jean Valjean became the mayor of Madeleine and saved the poor after 19 years of imprisonment, Jo Jinwoong has also lived a rehabilitated life, bringing comfort and joy to the public through the art of acting."
© The Asia Business Daily(www.asiae.co.kr). All rights reserved.
