Dongguk Exposed: A Decade of Sexual Violence Negligence (2016–2025)
Link back to the timeline at genderwatchdog.org
Subject: Follow-Up on Dongguk University's Sexual Violence Policies, Structural Vulnerabilities & Timeline (2016–2025)
Dear Dongguk University International Office and Graduate School Office,
It has now been over three weeks since my last message on March 14, which was sent directly to your offices and faculty members. A further version was shared with your partner institutions in Asia on March 15, to raise awareness of serious concerns that may affect exchange students. A full list of Dongguk's global academic partners is publicly available here:
👉 Dongguk's Global Academic Partners
As there has been no formal response, I am now following up with a consolidated summary of critical issues, which include: unresolved faculty composition problems, heightened structural risks due to proximity to industry players (Sidus FNH), and concerns around curriculum, accountability, and student protections.
1. 2016: Professor Replacement Policy and Sexual Violence Case
Dongguk introduced a rule in August 2016 allowing students to request a different professor if they experienced verbal or sexual abuse:
• Dongguk University changes policy to help students who suffer verbal or sexual abuse
The timing of this policy exposes a deeply troubling pattern of institutional negligence:
Timeline of Cover-up:
- November 2015: A professor from the Media Communication Major sexually assaulted a female graduate during a drinking meeting
- One week later: The victim reported the crime to police
- February 2016: University administration admitted they were notified by prosecutors about the case, yet took NO action
- August 2016: University announced the professor replacement policy while the case was still under investigation
- September 2016: The professor was formally prosecuted for sexual assault • A Professor from Media Communication Major Charged for Sexual Violence
This chronology reveals several alarming aspects of Dongguk's approach to sexual violence:
- Deliberate Inaction: Despite knowing about the allegations for 6-7 months, the university took no disciplinary action until formal prosecution
- Public Relations Over Protection: The policy was introduced only after the case threatened to become public, suggesting it was primarily a damage control measure
- Administrative Excuse-Making: University officials claimed they "were not able to make a disciplinary action because the case was still on investigation" – a clear abdication of responsibility to protect students
- Systemic Barriers to Reporting: The victim went to police rather than university channels, indicating a lack of trust in internal reporting mechanisms
Rather than proactively addressing sexual violence, Dongguk's pattern demonstrates a willingness to shield faculty from consequences until external pressure (legal prosecution or media attention) forces their hand. The token policy appears designed more to protect the university's reputation than to support victims.
Questions:
- Has any student successfully invoked this professor replacement policy?
- Is the policy still actively enforced in 2025, particularly in the Graduate School of Digital Image & Contents?
- Why does the university wait for criminal prosecution rather than conducting its own investigations when sexual violence allegations arise?
2. 2018: MeToo Movement & Abolition of the Women's Student Council
During the height of the MeToo movement in 2018, Dongguk abolished its Women's Student Council — previously a key advocacy group for female students:
• Dongguk University Women's Student Council Abolition Case
The above website may not be accessible from your location in which case, please download the website .html files and other files from:
👉 Women's Student Council Abolition Case Files
Questions:
- Why was this student-led body dismantled during a period of heightened global awareness around sexual violence?
- Has Dongguk created any alternative group or mechanism to protect and represent female students?
3. 2025: All-Male Faculty & Lack of Transparent Policies
As of 2025, the Master's in Film program remains entirely male, according to Dongguk's official site:
• Archived Faculty Directory
This creates significant power imbalances and raises the risk of unchecked misconduct. Contextual data includes:
- Professors are often the main perpetrators of sexual violence in Korean graduate schools
• Korea Times: Professors account for over 60% of sex offenders at universities - Korean universities grant excessive power to professors, increasing student vulnerability
• Korea Herald: Academic sexual violence cases rise at universities - High prevalence of sexual violence in universities
• Korea Times: Universities should play bigger role in sexual violence prevention - Post-MeToo study on sexual violence in arts education programs
• KWDI Research PDF or Alternative Link - 2023 peer-reviewed study on sexual violence in the Korean film industry and the power-threat model
• 2023 Study on Sexual Violence in Korean Film Industry - 2019 survey summary on sexual violence in the Korean film industry (749 participants)
• 2019 Survey Summary - Full KWDI report on post-MeToo sexual violence in arts universities (2020)
• Full KWDI Report
Key Questions:
- How does Dongguk justify having zero female faculty while claiming to uphold sexual violence prevention policies?
- Without a Women's Student Council, how can female or exchange students safely report misconduct?
- Is the 2016 professor replacement policy still operational and publicly visible to students?
4. On-Campus Industry Exposure & Structural Vulnerabilities
It has come to light that Sidus FNH, one of Korea's top film production companies, shares physical space with the graduate school program.
This shared space radically increases the risk of boundary violations, especially when:
- Students and industry staff interact informally in elevators, cafeterias, or shared hallways
- Students may feel pressure to network with powerful men who can influence their future employment
- There is no formal oversight of these interactions, nor structured protections for students (e.g., chaperoning, reporting mechanisms, professional boundaries)
The risk for sexual violence, inappropriate recruitment practices, and psychological grooming is exacerbated in environments where:
- Young women are dependent on connections
- All-male faculty reinforce hierarchical silence
- Industry insiders walk freely among vulnerable students
This arrangement is not just negligent — it is dangerous.
Hoesik Risks:
Women in Korea are increasingly refusing to attend post-class or work drinking parties (hoesik) due to the risk of sexual violence:
• Korea Herald: Korea's hoesik culture faces criticism
• Asahi: Women in South Korea turn back on drinking parties after dark
Yet without female faculty, ombudspersons, or safe reporting, students at Dongguk may feel pressured to attend these gatherings, particularly when linked to career advancement.
5. Institutional Inaction Despite Known Risk Factors
Combined with:
- The dissolution of the Women's Student Council in 2018
- The lack of female faculty members
- And the absence of transparency around sexual violence reporting history
…it is clear that Dongguk University is failing to maintain basic safeguards against sexual violence in line with global academic and labor standards.
A growing body of international research confirms that gender-diverse faculties contribute to better outcomes for all students — not just female or international learners.
For reference, please see this report: 👉 Gender Diversity in Academic Settings Report
6. Symbolic Curriculum Bias: French Over English
The program emphasizes French language, while offering no English-language training or support — despite English being the dominant language in global cinema:
- English is used in international co-productions, global grants, and film festivals
- Most international film industry networking, policy discourse, and distribution occurs in English
Questions:
- Why is there no English-language component in the curriculum?
- Does this decision reflect a male-centric fantasy about cinema rather than a practical learning objective?
This curriculum imbalance reflects:
- Aesthetic elitism over employability
- Coded masculinity hidden behind "taste" and "tradition"
- Lack of commitment to real-world career preparation for both female and international students
7. "Policies Without Female Faculty Are Structural Performance, Not Protection"
Dongguk's sexual violence policy framework—while strong on paper—is structurally undermined by:
- Zero female faculty
- No women-led oversight
- A dissolved student council
- No published sexual violence data
As the Korean Women's Development Institute has stated:
"Although universities that possess cultural and artistic education programs are responsible for establishing a system for sexual violence grievance counseling and case handling that encompasses all students and faculty members, the reality is that the system for sexual violence prevention is operated as a formality, and cannot be expected to protect and support students" (KWDI, 2020, p. 12)
This has been commonly observed across many Korean universities, and the Korean Women's Development Institute (KWDI) reports that these institutional deficiencies are structural.
In this system:
- Female students face retaliation and reputational risk for speaking up
- International women may fear for visas, careers, or grades
- Male professors are effectively unaccountable
These are not safeguards. These are institutional liabilities masquerading as ethics.
📩 Requested Response
We respectfully request answers to the following:
- Clarification on how the 2016 "professor replacement" policy is enforced in 2025.
- Explanation for the abolition of the Women's Student Council in 2018, and whether any replacement body exists.
- What steps Dongguk is taking to address the all-male faculty composition in the Master's in Film program.
- What safeguards exist to prevent exploitation or sexual violence involving Sidus FNH collaborations.
- Clarification on the curricular decision to prioritize French cinema while excluding English-language cinema.
- Whether Dongguk maintains any sexual violence reporting data, and if so, whether it is publicly available.
🧭 Request for Accountability
We again urge:
- Formal inquiry by partner institutions abroad
- Suspension of academic partnerships with Dongguk University until gender equity reforms are implemented
- Public disclosure of sexual violence reporting data and faculty gender balance over the last 10 years
Given the international community's zero-tolerance approach to sexual violence in educational institutions, we believe Dongguk University must clarify whether its policies, faculty structure, and academic culture implement the necessary protective measures required by global standards for student safety
We look forward to your response.
Sincerely,
Gender Watchdog