University Official Sentenced for Falsifying Attendance Records of International Students
A university official has been sentenced to prison for falsifying attendance records to assist international students in extending their stay in South Korea. But was this just a matter of administrative convenience, or does it indicate a more systematic malpractice?
Case Overview
Attendance Rate Manipulation: From 22% to 74.5%
- Defendant: Mr. A, a 63-year-old professor and head of a Korean language institute at a university in Gangwon-do.
- Incident: In June 2022, Mr. A submitted a falsified attendance confirmation for international student B, incorrectly stating an attendance rate of 74.5%, when it was only 22%. This document was used to apply for an extension of B’s stay at the immigration office.
- Further Actions: The same method was employed a total of 182 times until September 2023.
Summary of Claims
Prosecution and Court:
- Charged with obstruction of official duties.
- Violated the Immigration Control Act.
- Stressed that attendance records are critical in assessing residency qualifications.
- Considered actions as undermining the integrity of the residency process and trust in administrative procedures.
Defendant:
- Mr. A argued that he merely supplemented the attendance records within the bounds of his authority and discretion.
- He claimed that his actions were meant to prevent students from becoming illegal residents.
- Mr. A appealed, stating that “the sentence is too harsh.”
Court’s Ruling: Falsifying Documents is Illegal
First Instance:
- The court remarked that Mr. A had “disturbed the order of immigration administration.”
- Considering the number of international students and the duration of the fraud, the scale was deemed significant.
- Verdict: 10 months in prison, suspended for two years.
Second Instance:
- The appellate court upheld the original ruling.
- Described attendance manipulation as a serious act that made legitimate residency assessments impossible.
- Noted that if students become illegal residents, the institution loses its eligibility to recruit international students, indicating that Mr. A’s actions prioritized the school’s interests over those of the students.
- Dismissed the argument that the punishment was unjust; no new factors suggested leniency.
Significance of the Ruling
This case cannot simply be attributed to a clerical error; it highlights the importance of integrity in educational and administrative practices. Institutions must be vigilant in similar situations, keeping the following points in mind:
- Attendance rates and academic performance should be managed based on objective metrics, and should not be altered arbitrarily, even by institutional heads.
- Immigration-related documentation greatly influences administrative decisions; providing false information can lead to criminal penalties.
- “Well-meaning” deceit to avoid illegal residency is not legally justified.
This ruling serves as a critical reminder for educational institutions about upholding ethical standards and the potential consequences of compromising integrity.