Officer A, a patrol team member at a local police station in Seoul, recently responded to a report that elementary school students were smoking in an alley. At the scene, students appearing to be in fifth or sixth grade were discarding cigarette butts and spitting. When Officer A attempted to verify their identities for guidance purposes, the students shouted back, "What are you going to do with our names?" and made derogatory remarks about the police. Under Korea's Juvenile Act, police have no explicit investigative authority over "chokbeop sonyeon" (juvenile offenders aged 10 to 13), leaving Officer A with no choice but to issue a warning and walk away.
Crimes committed by juvenile offenders under 14 are increasing annually, and methods are becoming more brutal. Yet frontline officers who encounter these minors first lack the legal authority to conduct necessary investigations, creating significant challenges in the field. While acting President Lee Jae-myung recently mentioned the possibility of lowering the age threshold for juvenile offenders, sparking social debate, voices from the field are growing louder that police investigative powers should be addressed before adjusting age limits.
According to the Ministry of Justice's Court Statistics Monthly Report, 21,095 juvenile offenders under 14 were apprehended by police last year—approximately 80% more than the 11,677 recorded in 2021. Including "at-risk juveniles" aged 10 and above who show potential for criminal behavior and "criminal juveniles" aged 14 to 18 who have committed crimes, the total number of juvenile offenders reaches 51,360. Those who committed violent crimes including murder, robbery, rape, and sexual assault increased from 479 in 2021 to 826 last year. Frontline officers commonly point out that juvenile crime has expanded beyond simple delinquency to violent and sophisticated offenses.
The problem is that police effectively have their hands tied when dealing with these minors. The current Juvenile Act designates family court juvenile divisions as the authority for protective and criminal dispositions for antisocial juveniles, but does not clearly define the extent of police investigative powers in the early stages of cases. This creates significant concerns at the frontline that attempts to verify identities, request appearances, conduct voluntary accompaniment, or secure evidence could lead to allegations of procedural violations or human rights infringement. Combined with the burden of internal investigations and civil complaints, officers have little choice but to respond passively.
School Police Officers (SPOs) handle school violence and delinquency issues at schools, but they also lack investigative authority. One officer with experience in juvenile cases said, "If students don't cooperate, we can't even confirm names and contact information, let alone conduct investigations. Even if we arrest someone in the act, discovering afterward that they're a juvenile offender under 14 creates significant procedural burdens."
Amid these concerns, police are pursuing amendments to the Juvenile Act to clarify police investigative authority in juvenile cases. The rationale is that as juvenile crime becomes more sophisticated, facts must be thoroughly established and causes of delinquency diagnosed from the earliest stages. Police plan to collect specific cases from frontline officers involving refusals to appear, failures to secure evidence, and difficulties dealing with guardians, while also examining inefficiencies where the same matters are re-investigated after cases are transferred to juvenile divisions due to inadequate initial police investigations.
Based on this review, police plan to design a legislative model covering the entire process from case intake to voluntary accompaniment, investigation procedures, guardian notification, and expert consultation. They are also considering ways to reduce field difficulties with appearance requests, investigations, and searches while incorporating juvenile crime expert participation and delinquency cause diagnosis procedures from the early investigation stage. To reduce human rights concerns, measures will include thoroughly explaining investigation purposes, reasons, and subsequent procedures, while substantively guaranteeing guardians' and attorneys' rights to participate. Legislative supplements for selective transfer of juvenile offenders and police guidance systems are also under review.
Experts say police investigative authority over juvenile offenders can no longer be neglected. Lee Yun-ho, professor of police administration at Dongguk University, said, "Juvenile offender cases have many restrictions on both investigation and disposition, which can make it appear to citizens that police are doing nothing. As this can also lead to declining morale among frontline officers, the entire system needs to be updated to reflect reality."
