Sehan University foundation loses lawsuit against Hankyoreh over student labor reports

The school foundation operating Sehan University has definitively lost a lawsuit against the Hankyoreh newspaper, which had reported on allegations of illegal foreign student admissions and forced labor. The foundation had sought damages and a correction of the reports, but both the initial and appellate courts ruled against them, confirming the newspaper's victory as the foundation chose not to appeal further.

The Seoul High Court dismissed the foundation's appeal on June 26. This followed a September 26 ruling by the Seoul Western District Court, which rejected the foundation's claims for corrections and 50 million won in damages, also ordering the foundation to bear the legal costs. The Hankyoreh had published five reports in February 2024 detailing how Sehan University, in collaboration with a labor brokerage firm, admitted 29 students from East Timor and subsequently assigned them to work at a clam farm. The reports also questioned the handling of their tuition fees.

The first court found it difficult to deem the newspaper's reports as false based on the evidence presented. It also determined that Sehan University's issuance of admission letters without full tuition payment violated both Ministry of Justice guidelines and the university's own standards. Regarding the tuition fee reports, the court criticized the practice of the university accepting tuition payments indirectly through a study abroad agency, whose representative was the university president's son, rather than directly from the foreign students. The court stated this was highly inappropriate under private school laws.

Furthermore, the court recognized the Hankyoreh's reporting as a public interest piece concerning the credibility of educational institutions and the risk of exploiting student labor. It noted that the newspaper had conducted necessary verification processes, including interviewing experts and offering Sehan University a chance to respond. The appellate court upheld the first court's findings, stating that the initial judgment was sound.