Brazen Administrative Lawsuit by a Bully: Flawless Defense and Complete Victory for the Victim
26-07-08 19
본문
1. Case Overview
The client (the victim student) in this case suffered immense mental distress due to continuous bullying and verbal abuse by the perpetrator at school and cram schools. Consequently, the School Violence Countermeasures Deliberation Committee was convened. The Committee recognized the perpetrator's actions as school violence and issued disciplinary actions, including community service and a prohibition on contact, threats, and retaliation against the victim. However, instead of reflecting on their wrongdoing, the perpetrator's side filed an administrative lawsuit against the Superintendent of Education seeking the cancellation of the disciplinary action, arguing that the punishment was too severe and some facts were incorrect.
Generally, the defendant in an administrative lawsuit filed by a perpetrator appealing a school violence disciplinary action is the 'Superintendent of Education.' If the victim's side does not actively intervene in the trial, there is a high risk of failing to properly counter the perpetrator's attempts to cleverly minimize or distort the facts. In this case, the perpetrator's side argued substantive flaws by subtly lowering the severity of their actions, claiming, "I didn't throw the ball; I only pretended to," and "I never made direct threatening remarks." If the client had relied solely on the Office of Education's defense without participating in the lawsuit, the trial could easily have leaned toward the perpetrator's excuses, leading to a dangerous situation where the disciplinary action might have been canceled or reduced.
Law Firm Theo swiftly intervened in the lawsuit as the legal representative of the sub-participant (the victim student) for the defendant, completely reversing the flow of the trial as follows:
- Active Impeachment of Contradictions in the Perpetrator's Statements: We meticulously analyzed the statements and evidence submitted by the perpetrator's side and logically rebutted them, proving their claims were entirely false. We strongly emphasized to the court that the opponent's clever excuses ("it was a joke," "I didn't say it directly") were mere evasions that obscured the true nature of the school violence.
- Proving the Legitimacy and "Leniency" of the Disposition: While the perpetrator claimed the punishment was unlawfully harsh and an abuse of discretionary power, Law Firm Theo legally proved that, considering the continuous and malicious nature of the perpetrator's actions, the current disposition was by no means excessive, but rather lenient.
- Acting as a Shield Representing the Victim's Voice: While the administrative agency (Office of Education) primarily defended procedural legitimacy, Law Firm Theo focused the argument on the 'actual damage and suffering endured by the victim,' helping the court accurately perceive the severity of the case.
4. Result of Assistance
As a result of Law Firm Theo's active intervention and flawless defense, the court dismissed all of the perpetrator's (plaintiff's) claims, resulting in a complete victory for the client. The court explicitly ruled that the perpetrator's actions clearly constituted school violence and that the disciplinary action taken was legitimate and did not deviate from or abuse discretionary power. Furthermore, the court ordered the perpetrator's side to bear all litigation costs, including those incurred by Law Firm Theo's sub-participation, concluding the case as our perfect victory.
________________________
