March 5, 2026
SEOUL – The government has begun a formal public deliberation process on whether to lower the minimum age of criminal responsibility for “juvenile offenders,” after President Lee Jae Myung signaled support for reducing the current threshold from 14 to 13.
The move reopens a decadeslong debate over how Korea should respond to rising public concern about youth crime, even as ministries and experts remain sharply divided.
According to the Ministry of Gender Equality and Family on Wednesday, preparations are underway to establish a public deliberation committee that will include government officials, legal experts and citizens. The government is also considering an online platform to gather broad public input.
Under the current law, children aged 10 to under 14 are categorized as “juvenile offenders” and are exempt from criminal punishment. They instead receive protective dispositions under the Juvenile Act. The age standard has remained unchanged since South Korea’s Criminal Act was first enacted in 1953.
Calls for reform have intensified in recent years as the number of juvenile offenders receiving protective measures has steadily increased, reaching 7,294 in 2024, according to data released by the Supreme Court. The issue has been debated under multiple administrations, but no government has reached a conclusion.
The issue reignited recently after President Lee said that “an overwhelming majority of the public seems to believe the age should be lowered by at least one year” during a Cabinet meeting on Jan. 24 and instructed ministries to reach a conclusion within two months.
But consensus remains elusive within the government.
The Ministry of Justice supports lowering the age, arguing that crimes committed by younger adolescents are becoming more serious and sophisticated.
Gender Equality Minister Won Min-kyung has urged caution, stressing the importance of safeguarding children’s development. The position aligns with the National Human Rights Commission of Korea, which reiterated its opposition and is preparing a statement warning that a rapid decision could undermine children’s rights.
Legal and academic opinion is also split.
Lee Yoon-ho, a professor of police administration at Dongguk University, said the current threshold is outdated, arguing that “13-year-olds today are very different from 13-year-olds 70 years ago.”
He added that the role of the criminal code is not only to prevent crime but also to assign responsibility.
Rights groups and some attorneys said the proposal lacks evidence and risks harming vulnerable children.
The civic group Lawyers for a Democratic Society criticized the president’s timeline, saying policy changes of such magnitude should not be rushed.
They also noted that juvenile offenders account for about 4 percent of all crimes and argue that underlying factors such as unstable home environments should be addressed first.
Academics from five major associations on children and youth studies also challenged the Justice Ministry’s comparisons with foreign legal systems, saying Korea’s interpretation is misleading.
While some countries set low statutory ages for criminal liability, many do not actually punish children in that age group. In South Korea, protective dispositions can involve confinement in juvenile facilities and leave records that influence future sentencing.
Experts also dispute the narrative that serious crimes by juvenile offenders are sharply increasing.
Attorney Park In-suk said minors under 14 often commit offenses alongside older teenagers, and that recent increases in sexual offense statistics partly reflect higher reporting and greater public awareness. She and others stress the need to expand alternative housing and group homes for children without stable family environments.
Some officials believe the president’s directive could accelerate the decision-making process. The Gender Equality Ministry is reviewing past public deliberation models, including the one used during discussions on nuclear reactor construction, and considering including youth representatives in the committee.
Still, critics argue that questions of criminal responsibility should be resolved through legal analysis rather than public sentiment.
Sora-mi, a lawyer and non-standing member of the National Human Rights Commission, said punitive approaches are politically attractive but ultimately insufficient.
“Most juvenile offenders cannot safely return home,” she said. “Instead of leaning on punishment, society needs to invest in the protections and infrastructure that prevent children from becoming adult offenders.”