The South Korean Ministry of Gender Equality and Family held its first public forum on reducing the age of criminal responsibility from 14 to 13, following President Lee Jae-myung's suggestion that the majority of the public supports lowering the age. This move comes amid growing concerns about youth crime, which some argue is increasing in both prevalence and severity. Although discussions highlight that juvenile crime rates have tripled over the past decade, the increase primarily involves theft, violence, and sexual offenses, while violent crime rates such as murder and robbery have remained stable. The implications of these statistics raise concerns about whether lowering the age would effectively address the root causes of youth crime or introduce more unintended consequences.

Critics of the current juvenile justice system argue that it excludes victims' perspectives and grants impunity to juvenile offenders, suggesting modifications could enhance accountability. However, even without formal criminal charges, children over 10 are currently subjected to measures such as juvenile detention under the youth law. Legal experts from the Supreme Court and the National Human Rights Commission contend that the treatment and penalties under juvenile law are not necessarily lighter than criminal law, which complicates the narrative on juvenile justice. This need for balanced public discussion about reforms underscores the importance of understanding the nuances surrounding youth justice and prevention measures.

While today's adolescents may appear physically mature compared to the past, evidence supporting their cognitive or emotional maturity is lacking. This aligns with the UN Committee on the Rights of the Child's recommendation to maintain the minimum age of criminal responsibility at 14. Additionally, implementing custodial sentences could obstruct educational opportunities for these youths, possibly leading to counterproductive social isolation and criminal behavior patterns. The example of Denmark's adjustment to its criminal responsibility age serves as a cautionary tale, demonstrating how well-intentioned reforms can sometimes lead to unintended increases in recidivism rates, urging a more cautious approach to this significant issue.