Advocates call for swifter action against perpetrators and broader changes to domestic violence laws
Three recent killings, one in Songpa-gu in Seoul, another on Jeju Island, and third in Jeonju, North Jeolla Province, have raised questions about the effectiveness of South Korea’s anti-stalking law and its victim-protection system. In each case, police had received prior reports about the suspect.
“We cannot protect victims without taking measures against perpetrators,” Song Ran-hee, a representative of the Korea Women’s Hotline, said at a press conference in Seoul on Wednesday marking five years since the Act on Punishment of Crime of Stalking took effect on Oct. 21, 2021.
The law went into effect 22 years after legislation was first proposed in 1999. It introduced tougher penalties and protective procedures for persistent or repeated stalking, which had previously been treated largely as a minor offense.
Police recorded 51,838 cases in which suspects were apprehended under the law from 2021 through 2025, according to annual National Police Agency statistics.
Repeated reports, missed opportunities to protect
In Jeju, a woman in her 40s who had repeatedly reported stalking and dating violence was given a smartwatch as part of police safety measures.
Police believe the suspect removed it after seeing her touch her wrist. The watch was later found detached near her home, and no emergency alert was sent.
Police said no approach ban had been issued because the reports had not led to a formal criminal case.
In Songpa-gu on Oct. 11, a man allegedly killed his mother-in-law and abducted his estranged wife.
A court-ordered measure barring him from approaching his wife had expired on Sept. 30.
Police reapplied for a new order on Oct. 6, but the court issued it on Oct. 12, the day after the attack. The attack came 11 days after the previous measure expired.
“There was a 12-day gap between the expiration of the restraining order and the new order,” Song said. “The new order was issued only a day after the incident.”
The cases have highlighted the risk that protection may not be renewed while a threat persists, or may not be imposed quickly enough when a victim faces danger.
The killings have fueled calls for tighter restrictions on perpetrators and continuous protection for victims before violence escalates.
Calls to focus on perpetrators
For Jo Yoon-hee, managing partner of law firm Ichae, victims facing a credible risk of harm should be protected without authorities waiting for evidence that a crime has occurred.
“The standard of proof required for punishment must not become a reason to delay protection,” Jo said.
She said authorities should consider detaining perpetrators or placing them under electronic monitoring. Laws should also explicitly allow perpetrators to be removed from shared homes and specify which agency is responsible for checking compliance with restraining orders and responding promptly to violations, she said.
Jo called for risk assessments when suspects are released, prosecuted or reach the end of a protective measure, taking into account victims’ accounts and accumulated threats. Victims should also be able to seek court protection directly without waiting for investigators to turn down their requests, she said.
In a statement read aloud at the conference, an unnamed survivor of stalking and domestic violence described the consequences of protection ending. Her request to extend a three-month restraining order was rejected despite records of her husband’s attempts to approach her.
“The decision pointed to the fact that we were still married and even blamed me for not fulfilling my duties as a spouse,” she said.
Calls to revise domestic violence laws
A joint statement by civic groups called for an overhaul of the Act on Special Cases Concerning the Punishment of Crimes of Domestic Violence to cover continuing abuse across different intimate relationships.
Jo also urged comprehensive revisions to the Act on the Prevention of Domestic Violence and Protection of Victims.
Provisions addressing individual acts of stalking cannot adequately capture patterns of surveillance, isolation, economic dependence and coercive control, she said.
Other speakers at the conference called for changes to sentencing guidelines that allow leniency when victims oppose punishment or the fear caused is judged relatively minor.
Song said victims’ reluctance to seek punishment should not be interpreted as a sign that they no longer need protection.
The joint statement also called for expanded livelihood, medical and legal assistance.
“Reporting should be the beginning of a safe everyday life,” Jo said. “That is the change we demand today.”
shwang9@heraldcorp.com