Addressing Korea's surge in intimate partner violence
When a college student brutally murdered his girlfriend on a building rooftop in southern Seoul in 2024, the case made national headlines, unveiling the harrowing details of intimate partner violence (IPV).
Although the tragedy sparked discussions about creating safer spaces for women, concrete policy reforms or effective programs failed to materialize. Disappointingly, as media coverage dwindled over time, so did public interest, allowing the issue to slip from the government’s agenda.
Broadly, IPV refers to harmful or assaultive behavior within romantic or intimate relationships, including cohabitation, marriages and both serious and casual dating. It manifests in various forms, such as physical violence, sexual coercion or assault, psychological and emotional abuse and controlling behaviors, often committed by current or former spouses or partners. While this article does not deny or dismiss the significance of male victims of IPV, IPV remains a profoundly gendered issue, with women disproportionately bearing its brunt.
According to Korea Women’s Hot-Line, 70 women were murdered in 2009 by their current or former male partners, with seven cases of attempted murder. By 2023, fatalities nearly doubled to 138, while attempted murders reached 311. These statistics translate into one woman facing a threat or being killed every 19 hours. Stalking incidents, often a precursor to more severe forms of gendered violence, have also skyrocketed. Reported cases surged from 5,468 in 2019 to 31,824 in 2023, with over 90 percent involving female victims. Nonetheless, IPV remains overwhelmingly underreported due to fear of retaliation, economic and psychological dependence and a lack of trust in the legal system. This highlights the urgency needed to disrupt the cycle of violence through stronger prevention and support systems.
IPV is rarely random or spontaneous, especially when it involves stalking and homicide. Instead, it is often rooted in coercive control — a deliberate pattern of abusive behaviors aimed to gain and maintain control over the victims’ lives. Perpetrators employ various tactics, including credible threats, harassment, humiliation, micro-regulation, isolation and financial abuse. These are designed to erode the victim’s autonomy and psychological integrity. At its extreme, this control can escalate to homicide as the ultimate means of achieving complete dominance.
Although coercive control may not always entail physical or sexual violence, its repetitive and cumulative nature makes it particularly horrendous. Women subjected to this form of abuse navigate their daily lives in a state of hyper-vigilance, self-policing their actions to not provoke their abusers even when they are physically absent. This psychological entrapment leaves victims in a perpetual state of fear, with serious mental health complications. Despite these devastating effects, Korean law has not yet formally recognized coercive control.
In an effort to safeguard victims and hold perpetrators accountable, the Korean government passed the Stalking Punishment Act in April 2021. The law defines stalking as a range of behaviors, including physical approaching or following, uninvited waiting or watching, unsolicited contact, delivery of unwanted items and damaging property. However, this narrow definition excludes indirect methods of harassment (i.e., acquiring the victim’s information through a third party or exploiting pets as tools for intimidation) and forces victims to bear the burden of their own protection. In this context, ensuring victims’ safety often requires them to relocate, quit their jobs and erase all traces of personal information from online platforms. These measures, rather than empowering survivors, further destabilize their lives and exacerbate their social isolation.
To effectively address soaring IPV rates, Korea must implement legal and cultural reforms. These include broadening the legal definition of an “intimate partner” beyond familial ties and expanding the scope of recognized violence like Germany and the United Kingdom have. These nations incorporate IPV within the broader framework of domestic violence, acknowledging coercive control as a critical component, thereby ensuring more comprehensive protection and support for victims. Additionally, legal provisions must address the relationship between domestic violence and stalking, which are currently treated as separate offenses, creating critical loopholes in victim protection (i.e., fragmented investigations and inadequate sentencing). Over half of IPV emergency reports are dismissed on-site, and only a fraction of alleged offenders face arrest. Police officers should receive specialized training to enhance their ability to accurately assess risks and intervene effectively in these dangerous situations.
Likewise, it is crucial to confront cultural dynamics that contribute to the normalization of male violence against women in Korea by reshaping societal norms and perceptions. A pivotal strategy involves fostering a healthier understanding of masculinity. Equally important is the broader recognition of the far-reaching consequences of IPV — not only for victims but also for children, families and even those who perpetrate the abuse. Shifting toward a culture of mutual respect and collective well-being ultimately benefits society as a whole.
Ma Kyung-hee is an editor and researcher specializing in mental health.