Parents outraged by the collection of their child's mobile phone, guilty verdict for violence against teacher

A parent in their 30s received a guilty verdict for going to a school to verbally abuse a teacher and throw a mobile phone, after their child's phone was confiscated.

The 5-2 Criminal Appeals Division of the Suwon District Court (Judges Lee Jong-rok, Park Shin-young, Kim Haeng-soon) sentenced individual A, who was indicted for obstruction of official duties and insults, to one year in prison with a three-year suspended sentence, three years of probation, and 200 hours of community service on the 25th.

Individual A was prosecuted for verbally abusing teacher C and throwing a mobile phone at the public middle school in Gyeonggi Province, where their daughter B was enrolled, in September 2022.

The incident began when B submitted an unactivated mobile phone (a spare phone) before class, violating school regulations, and it was confiscated by teacher C.

B informed her mother, A, by borrowing a friend's mobile phone, and enraged, A went to the school and committed the offense.

Court's judgement on educational rights violation incident

Fortunately, teacher C was not injured as they were not hit by the phone thrown by A. However, the education authorities recognized the severity of the issue and reported A to the investigative agency, leading the prosecution to indict A without detention.

The first trial court noted in its ruling, "The defendant committed a serious offense by illegally entering the classroom, overflowing with anger towards the teacher and students rather than educating their child who violated school regulations."

The court also explained the sentencing rationale, stating, "The defendant appears to have a very strong impulsive and violent tendency, but considering that they are receiving psychiatric treatment and have no prior criminal record, this is their first offense."

After the first trial ruling, the prosecution appealed, stating, "It is necessary to impose severe punishment for indiscriminate acts of violating educational rights that obstruct legitimate educational activities to protect students' right to learn and teachers' right to teach."

However, the appellate court determined, "The first trial seems to have considered the fact that the defendant is undergoing psychiatric treatment and is trying not to re-offend when issuing a suspended sentence," concluding that "the original sentence does not appear to be excessively heavy or light beyond the reasonable limits of discretion," thus dismissing the prosecutor's appeal.

Image source: Reference photo for understanding the article / KBS 2TV's 'House of the Bluebird'