Chief judges have called for institutional reform after two cases: a knife attack by an ex-convict wearing an electronic monitoring anklet at a large commercial complex in Incheon, and the killing of a woman whose hideout address was exposed to her attacker during divorce proceedings. Their point was that restraining orders alone have limits in protecting victims, so information sharing among relevant agencies should be strengthened and safeguards put in place to prevent personal data from being exposed in litigation.
Lee Won-hyung, chief judge of the Seoul Family Court, said on the 16th that he felt "frustrated" about the Incheon knife attack, speaking at a parliamentary audit of the Seoul High Court and other courts by the National Assembly's Legislation and Judiciary Committee.
Asked by Yoon Sang-hyun of the People Power Party how to deal with a situation in which an offender could not be stopped even while wearing an electronic anklet, Lee said, "I think that in the end, additional steps such as sharing information with relevant agencies may be needed so that we do not stop at simply issuing restraining orders but can protect victims from further danger."
Kang Sung-soo, chief judge of the Incheon District Court, agreed that supplementary measures are needed to protect victims. "I extend my deepest condolences to the victims and their families who suffered severe mental and physical pain from the knife attack," Kang said. "I am not sure myself how this should be resolved, but I think one approach may be to reflect more detailed content in the special conditions of supervision."
A man in his 50s, identified only as A, attacked 10 strangers with a knife on the 13th at see&see, a large commercial complex in Guwol-dong, Namdong-gu, Incheon. A, who had two prior convictions for attempted murder, was wearing an electronic location-tracking device at the time of the crime.
Calls for reform at the court level were also raised over the case in which a victim's address was exposed to her attacker during divorce proceedings, leading to her killing.
Kim Dae-woong, chief judge of the Seoul High Court, said he viewed the exposure of personal data in litigation as "a serious problem" after Kim Dong-ah of the Democratic Party of Korea raised the issue, and expressed a willingness to improve it. "I think it is right to take active measures going forward on the judicial administration side," Kim said. "We should be able to make improvements and reform the system at this point, using this as an opportunity."
The lawmaker pointed out that an attacker can file a suit first, receive a court order to correct the address, and use it to obtain an abridged resident registration record and thereby secure the victim's address.
On the 1st, a woman in her 30s who was in divorce proceedings in Gwangju, Gyeonggi Province, was killed even though she had reported her husband's domestic violence and was under protective measures. Her husband, also in his 30s, is reported to have confirmed the address of her hideout as written in the complaint.
Kim Rae-ni, chief judge of the Suwon Family Court, expressed sorrow over the victim's death but said the court had handled the matter according to principle. "The family court investigator who met the victim a few days before the incident said she was the kindest person among all the parties they had met," Kim said. "It truly pained me that such a person became the victim of a horrific crime." Kim added, "The court handled the work by the book and according to principle."
Bae Joon-hyun, chief judge of the Suwon High Court, stressed the need to actively inform people about procedures for protecting personal data. "Basically, the usual practice is to have people file an application for personal data protection measures and to handle it according to that application," Bae said. "It appears that a procedure is needed for the court to actively publicize or explain the process when someone files a complaint."