School violence review often concludes with “they were hurt, therefore it’s school violence.” The Supreme Court has established a standard for this formula. It is not possible to consider all physical contact between elementary school lower grade students as school violence, and factors such as age, circumstances, and the need for guidance must be considered, according to the ruling. Parents preparing an administrative appeal against the school violence committee’s measures can utilize the ruling’s assessment factors verbatim in writing.
1. Supreme Court Case 2026Du30954, Case of a 1st Grade Elementary School Student
Verdict: September 3, 2026 (Thursday), Supreme Court Division 1, Appeal Dismissed
Background (Based on the Verdict)
- On March 22, 2023, during an after-school badminton class, a first-grade elementary school student pushed another student from the same class off the stage below the multipurpose room, causing injury.
- The Gyeonggi Province Office of Education School Violence Countermeasure Deliberation Committee deemed this as school violence and requested a written apology, and the Superintendent of Education implemented the written apology measure on February 2, 2024.
- The student who received the measure filed an administrative appeal, and the Gyeonggi Province Education Office Administrative Appeal Committee revoked the written apology measure on June 19, 2024, stating that it was difficult to view it as school violence.
- The injured student’s side filed a lawsuit seeking the revocation of this decision, but both the lower court (Suwon High Court 2026. 4. 24. 2025Nu745) and the Supreme Court rejected it.
Source: Supreme Court Verdict 2026Du30954
2. Whether it Constitutes School Violence, Judgment Factors Presented by the Supreme Court
The Supreme Court stated that when determining whether an act constitutes school violence, it should not be determined solely based on whether it fits within the definition in the regulations, but rather should comprehensively consider the following elements:
- Severity of the act
- Circumstances surrounding the occurrence and antecedent/subsequent conditions
- Age and relationship of the victim and perpetrator
- Necessity of guidance and education for the victim and perpetrator
The reasons cited were that the purpose of the School Violence Prevention Act is to protect the victim and guide/educate the perpetrator, and that students’ cognitive and judgmental abilities change significantly as they grow. It also pointed out that if all acts that cause harm are considered school violence, all conflicts in school life would become school violence.
Scope of Influence: This ruling applies to cases that were subject to the revised School Violence Prevention Act (prior to the revision on October 24, 2023). However, the elements of judgment originate from the purpose of the law, so they can be used as grounds for argument in the review of current law cases and administrative appeals.
3. Even with the same written apology, differing conclusions in the Cheongju District Court ruling
October 4th reporting from the Cheongju District Court Administrative Division 1 Panel represents an opposing conclusion. This involves an elementary school student approaching another student by sticking out their lips, causing the other student to dodge and collide with a pillar, resulting in injury. The Eumseong Office of Education issued a written apology, and the court dismissed the request for cancellation of the decision.
According to the report, the court considered that the student likely understood to some extent that the act could cause discomfort to the other party, having received basic education on sexuality. The court cited the consistency and specificity of the students’ statements, and the fact that the guardian admitted the facts during the investigation as grounds. Details such as grade level ⚠️ require confirmation from the full judgment.
Points to note from both judgments: School violence is not invalidated solely on the basis of young age. The Supreme Court case recognized the ages of 7, a single conflict, and a low need for guidance, while the Cheongju case cited the nature of the act, the student’s potential awareness, and consistent statements to support the decision.
Preparing an Administrative Appeal Regarding School Violence Committee Measures
- Deadline: An administrative appeal must be filed within 90 days from the date of notification of the decision. First, confirm the receipt date on the decision notification.
- Written Composition: Organizing facts in accordance with the four elements presented by the Supreme Court (severity, circumstances, age and relationship, need for guidance) will clarify the issues in the hearing.
- Materials: Secure materials such as viewing and copying the school violence committee meeting minutes, statements from witness students, and data on the class situation on that day.
- Victim Student: This case confirmed that the victim student can also challenge the decision if the measure is cancelled in the administrative appeal.
Administrative Agent (Administrative Scrivener) Office Services
Hwang Yunsang Administrative Agent’s Office prepares administrative appeal petitions and suspension of execution applications regarding school violence disciplinary decisions, organizes meeting minutes and statements, and acts as an agent for submission to the Education Office Administrative Appeal Committee. We also handle the preparation of supplementary submissions.
Summary
- On September 3, the Supreme Court upheld the administrative appeal decision that deemed the actions of an elementary school student not to be school violence (2026Du30954).
- Whether an act constitutes school violence is determined by comprehensively considering not only the wording but also the importance, circumstances, age, relationship, and the need for guidance.
- The Cheongju District Court upheld the written apology order in another elementary school student case based on the nature of the act and consistent statements.
This article is an administrative trend guide compiled by Hwang Yunsang Administrative Agent’s Office based on publicly available information. The applicability to individual cases requires verification with the relevant authority.