Five years after South Korea’s anti-stalking law took effect, women’s groups say victims remain exposed to lethal violence even after seeking police protection. A coalition of 179 organizations, including Korea Women’s Hotline, has called on the government and National Assembly to strengthen penalties and create protection measures capable of restraining alleged offenders before threats escalate.
Recent cases cited by Hankook Ilbo illustrate the danger. In Seoul’s Songpa district, the mother of a woman preparing a marriage annulment lawsuit was killed and the woman was abducted. In Jeju, a woman in her 40s who had reported stalking and dating violence was killed by a former partner. In Gongju, South Chungcheong Province, a woman in her 50s who had reported related abuse was found dead.
Police data indicate that violations of court-ordered interim measures rose from 533 cases in 2022 to 1,103 last year. From 2021 through last year, 16 victims died while receiving police safety measures in cases involving relationship-based violence. The figures support advocates’ contention that orders intended to restrict alleged offenders do not always provide effective physical separation.
Legal revisions have not ended the protection gap
The law has been revised since the fatal stalking attack at Sindang Station. Authorities removed a provision that had allowed cases to end when victims did not seek punishment, and sentencing guidelines were introduced in 2024. From October 2, police must send all stalking cases to the prosecution service regardless of their initial assessment of the allegations. A rule that automatically ended interim measures when police declined to forward a case was also removed.
- Reporting rule
- All stalking cases must be sent to the prosecution service from October 2
- Protection change
- A police decision not to forward a case no longer automatically ends interim measures
Women’s organizations and legal experts are pressing for a clearer separation between the standards for criminal punishment and those for victim protection. They argue that authorities should be able to isolate an alleged offender quickly when a concrete threat is identified, without waiting for the evidence needed to establish criminal liability. Attention will now turn to whether the revised referral rules preserve protection orders longer and whether lawmakers adopt stronger preventive controls.