South Korea's Constitutional Court has overturned the prosecution's decision to suspend indictment against an SBS producer who revealed the face of "Jeong-in," a toddler who died from abuse by her adoptive parents. The court ruled that the broadcast constituted a justifiable act serving the public interest.
According to legal sources on Wednesday, the Constitutional Court unanimously overturned on January 18 the Seoul Western District Prosecutors' Office's decision to suspend indictment against SBS producer Lee Dong-won on charges of violating the Child Abuse Punishment Act.
Lee released photos and videos showing Jeong-in's face in episodes of the SBS investigative program "Unanswered Questions" aired in January 2021, titled "Why Did Jeong-in Die: 271 Days of Perpetrators and Bystanders" and "Sorry Jeong-in, and Where Our Anger Should Go."
"The marks of abuse were concentrated particularly on her face, and we could not convey in words alone how shadows fell over the child's expression," the production team explained at the time.
However, in October 2021, civic group "Political Mamas" filed a complaint against Lee, alleging the broadcast exposed Jeong-in's face and personal information including her date of birth. In June 2023, the Seoul Western District Prosecutors' Office issued a suspension of indictment, acknowledging violations of the Child Abuse Punishment Act's reporting restrictions. A suspended indictment means charges are recognized but the case is not sent to trial considering various circumstances.
The Child Abuse Punishment Act prohibits broadcast editors and others from publicly disclosing personal information such as addresses, names, or photographs of child abuse perpetrators, victim children, complainants, or reporters through publications or broadcasts in child protection cases.
Lee filed a constitutional complaint against the suspended indictment, and the Constitutional Court overturned the decision after approximately two years of deliberation.
The court found that while Lee's actions formally met the requirements of the Child Abuse Punishment Act, they constituted a "justifiable act" under criminal law given the legitimacy of purpose and appropriateness of means. "The suspended indictment resulted from a serious misunderstanding of legal principles regarding justifiable acts or insufficient investigation, violating the petitioner's rights to equality and pursuit of happiness," the court stated.
The court specifically noted that "with the perpetrator denying the crime, the broadcast released photos and videos so viewers could judge for themselves and had them verified by experts" and that "aside from explaining family relationships and the circumstances of abuse, exposure of surrounding individuals was minimized and images were blurred."
The court also mentioned that since Jeong-in had already died, the fundamental purpose of the relevant provision—"preventing secondary harm to victim children and promoting healthy development"—could no longer be achieved. While the need to protect the personal interests of deceased victim children still exists, the court determined there was little possibility that private aspects of Jeong-in's life would be indiscriminately exposed or sensationally consumed through this broadcast.
"From the perspective of a child who died from abuse, the greatest benefit may be that the truth of the case is fully investigated and revealed, and the perpetrator receives punishment commensurate with their responsibility," the court emphasized. "Rather, this broadcast can be seen as serving the interests of the victim child."
The court further noted that the broadcast was produced for the public interest purpose of exposing the brutality of child abuse crimes and calling for appropriate punishment of perpetrators and institutional reform, and also represented an exercise of the fundamental right to press freedom.
Following the broadcast, adoptive mother Jang was found guilty of murder and other charges and sentenced to 35 years in prison. Institutional improvements were made including revisions to laws concerning prevention and punishment of child abuse crimes. The court also noted that the broadcast received multiple journalism awards.
