Teacher who punished elementary students with a racket claiming it was “just joking” loses lawsuit against pay cut disciplinary action.

A Grade Schooler Swung a Plastic Ruler and Badminton Racket… Court Rules "Lack of Basic Qualities"

A teacher who struck elementary school students with a ruler and a racket for playing around during class filed a lawsuit claiming the punishment was excessive, but the court did not accept this.

The court pointed out that the teacher's statements and actions raised doubts about his qualifications as an educator.

Image 1

Corporal Punishment Repeated the Next Day with a Ruler

On the 22nd, the Chuncheon District Court Administrative Division 1 (Presiding Judge Kim Byeong-cheol) announced a ruling in favor of the defendant in the case brought by teacher A from an elementary school in the Wonju area of Gangwon Province, which sought to cancel a one-month suspension disciplinary action imposed by the Wonju Office of Education.

In May 2023, during a third-grade class, A called a student who was playing around with friends to the front of the classroom, made him lie on the floor, and struck him ten times on the calves and once on the thigh with a plastic ruler. The next day and the day after, he struck the same student again on the palm and calf with the ruler.

In September 2022, it was revealed that A had also hit a student who was joking around in a fourth-grade classroom once each on the back and arm with the wide side of a badminton racket.

Claiming "I Just Tapped Lightly"… Court Determines 'Child Abuse'

Image 2

As a result of such actions, A received a protective order from the court requiring him to complete 40 hours of community service and attend 40 hours of lectures on preventing recidivism for child abuse. The education office imposed a one-month suspension, and after A filed for a review with the Teacher's Administrative Appeals Committee, which was dismissed, he initiated an administrative lawsuit.

In court, A claimed, "I only tapped lightly for the protection of other students' right to education, and it is not child abuse," but the court did not accept this.

The court stated, "According to relevant laws, a method that inflicts physical pain is not permitted when guiding students," and concluded, "Given the nature and frequency of the actions, a penalty harsher than a suspension could be considered. However, considering it was limited to a minor penalty, the disciplinary action cannot be deemed excessive."

"Unaware of the Ban on Corporal Punishment… Questioning Teacher's Qualities"

In particular, the court strongly pointed out, "A's claim in court that he was 'unaware that teachers cannot use corporal punishment' raises questions about his basic qualities as an educational leader."

Image 3

Furthermore, it emphasized the necessity of the disciplinary action, saying, "Despite the fact that teachers are responsible for students' character formation and education on ethics and values, the conduct undermined public trust in the entire teaching profession."

Ultimately, the court dismissed A's claims. It has been reported that A is currently considering further responses.

Image source: gettyimagesbank