Appeal failed.
A 33-year-old married male teacher who had an inappropriate relationship with his 11-year-old student for 11 years tried to argue that they were in love, but the judge did not buy it.
Now aged 52, the teacher was sentenced to 14 years and 2 months in jail. He appealed against both his conviction and his jail term, but the High Court rejected his appeal.
The judge said clearly that this is not love, this is exploitation. The teacher was 21 years older than the victim and had used his position of trust to take advantage of her.
According to Shin Min Daily News, the victim is now 31. The teacher faced 8 charges, including sexual assault of a minor and offences under the Children and Young Persons Act. He denied all charges but was found guilty after trial.
To protect the victim, the court has issued a gag order to prevent the media from revealing any information that could expose her identity.
Court documents revealed that the two began their relationship in September 2006. A year later, things turned physical. It started with touching and masturbation, then escalating to digital penetration. Before the girl even turned 16, the teacher had already had sex with her.
This secret relationship continued until June 13, 2017. That was when the victim’s older sister found three video clips in her phone.
In the clips, the victim talked about her emotional struggles, how she wanted to break up with the teacher but didn’t dare to tell anyone, and how she was worried the teacher might get into trouble.
That discovery finally exposed the long-running abuse.
During the appeal, the teacher claimed that he and the victim were in a romantic relationship, and even accused the victim of being the one in control. But the judge did not believe him, saying that he was just trying to shift blame and attack the victim’s character.
The judge added that the teacher abused his position of authority. As her teacher, he should have protected and guided her and not taken advantage of her.
The court also found the sentence appropriate and not too harsh. The appeal was fully dismissed.
