1 in 5 Korean women faces violence in intimate relationships – The Korea Herald

Report on Intimate Partner Violence in South Korea and its Implications for Sustainable Development Goals

Executive Summary

A report by the Korea Women’s Development Institute (KWDI) reveals a significant increase in intimate partner violence (IPV) against women in South Korea. The findings underscore a critical failure in the nation’s statistical and institutional frameworks, which directly impedes progress toward key Sustainable Development Goals (SDGs), particularly SDG 5 (Gender Equality) and SDG 16 (Peace, Justice and Strong Institutions). The absence of a comprehensive system to capture data on violence in non-marital relationships renders victims statistically invisible and obstructs the development of effective protective measures.

Key Findings and Statistical Overview

The analysis, based on nationwide surveys from 2021 and 2024, presents the following data:

• Overall Prevalence: 19.2% of women reported experiencing at least one form of intimate partner violence in their lifetime, an increase from 16.1% in 2021.
• Severe Violence: The rate of physical and sexual violence rose from 10.6% to 14% over the same period.
• Dating Violence: Lifetime victimization from dating violence increased from 5% to 6.4%. Women in their 20s reported the highest rate at 2.7% in the last year.
• Systemic Failures: A series of high-profile femicides occurred despite victims seeking help through official channels, including police reports, restraining orders, and emergency safety devices, highlighting significant “blind spots” in the state’s protection system.

Alignment with Sustainable Development Goals (SDGs)

The report’s findings indicate a critical disconnect between the current situation and South Korea’s commitment to the SDGs.

1. SDG 5: Gender Equality
   • The rising prevalence of IPV directly contravenes Target 5.2, which calls for the elimination of all forms of violence against women and girls.
   • The lack of a state-level statistical system that includes non-marital relationships means that a significant portion of gender-based violence is unmeasured, making it impossible to track progress or formulate evidence-based policy.
2. SDG 16: Peace, Justice and Strong Institutions
   • Recent femicide cases, where state protection mechanisms failed, demonstrate a lack of progress toward Target 16.1 (significantly reduce all forms of violence) and Target 16.3 (ensure equal access to justice).
   • The report suggests that as long as violence within “private relationships” is considered beyond the scope of state intervention, the justice system cannot provide adequate protection for all victims.

The Critical Role of Data in Policy and Prevention

The KWDI report stresses that the absence of accurate national-level data is a primary barrier to addressing IPV and achieving related SDG targets. This statistical invisibility leads to several critical failures:

• Inability to design effective prevention policies tailored to the true scale of the problem.
• Insufficient allocation of resources for victim support and intervention programs.
• Missed opportunities for early intervention before violence escalates into severe crimes such as assault, rape, and homicide.
• A significant underrepresentation of IPV, which is considered a major “hidden crime,” as only the most extreme cases are officially recorded.

Recommendations for Institutional Reform

To address these systemic gaps and align with its commitments under the SDGs, the KWDI calls for immediate and comprehensive action in the following areas:

1. Legal Reform: Enact legislation to formally recognize and address violence occurring within all forms of intimate relationships, including dating and cohabiting partnerships.
2. Integrated National Data Production: Establish a unified, state-level statistical system to systematically collect data on all forms of IPV and femicide, ensuring that all victims are counted.
3. Dedicated Monitoring Systems: Create dedicated institutional frameworks to monitor trends in intimate partner violence and assess the effectiveness of state interventions and protection policies.

Analysis of Sustainable Development Goals in the Article

1. Which SDGs are addressed or connected to the issues highlighted in the article?

• SDG 5: Gender Equality

  This goal is central to the article, which focuses entirely on violence against women as a major barrier to gender equality. The text discusses various forms of intimate partner violence—physical, sexual, emotional, and economic—that disproportionately affect women. The article’s core argument, that a “lack of system to statistically capture such violence puts women in more significant danger,” directly addresses the need to make gender-based violence visible and to create policies that ensure women’s safety and equality.

• SDG 16: Peace, Justice and Strong Institutions

  The article extensively critiques the failure of institutional systems in South Korea. It highlights “blind spots… in Korea’s protection and support system,” citing specific cases where legal and police protections like restraining orders and emergency smartwatches failed to prevent homicides. The call for “legal reform, integrated national data production and dedicated systems to monitor intimate-partner violence” is a direct appeal to build more effective, accountable, and just institutions, which is the essence of SDG 16.

2. What specific targets under those SDGs can be identified based on the article’s content?

1. Target 5.2: Eliminate all forms of violence against all women and girls in the public and private spheres.

   The article’s subject is intimate partner violence, a form of violence occurring in the private sphere. It details the rising prevalence of “physical, sexual, emotional, economic abuse or controlling behavior” against women by current or former partners. The report’s findings that “19.2 percent of women reported experiencing at least one form of intimate partner violence” directly align with the scope of this target.

2. Target 16.1: Significantly reduce all forms of violence and related death rates everywhere.

   The article emphasizes the lethal nature of intimate partner violence, noting its “high likelihood of escalation into severe crimes such as assault, rape and homicide.” It cites “a string of high-profile murders” and the alarming estimate that “a woman is killed by an intimate partner every two days.” This directly connects to the goal of reducing violence-related death rates.

3. Target 16.3: Promote the rule of law at the national and international levels and ensure equal access to justice for all.

   The article provides clear examples of the justice system’s failure to protect victims. Women were murdered despite having “a court-issued restraining order,” “filing stalking reports,” and receiving “emergency police protection.” This demonstrates a breakdown in the rule of law and a failure to provide equal access to justice and protection for victims of gender-based violence.

3. Are there any indicators mentioned or implied in the article that can be used to measure progress towards the identified targets?

• Prevalence of Intimate Partner Violence

  The article explicitly provides statistics that serve as indicators for Target 5.2. These include:

  • The lifetime prevalence of intimate partner violence against women, which rose from 16.1% in 2021 to 19.2% in 2024.
  • The lifetime prevalence of physical and sexual violence, which increased from 10.6% to 14%.
  • The annual dating-violence rate for women in their 20s, which was 2.7% last year.

• Femicide/Homicide Rate by an Intimate Partner

  An indicator for Target 16.1 is implied by the statement that “a woman is killed by an intimate partner every two days.” The article’s call for dedicated systems to “monitor intimate-partner violence and femicide” suggests that tracking the number of women killed by partners is a critical metric for measuring the severity of the problem and the effectiveness of interventions.

• Existence of a National Data Collection System

  The central argument of the article is the “absence of a state-level statistical system.” Therefore, the establishment of an “integrated national data production” system to capture violence in all intimate relationships (not just domestic/marital) is a crucial institutional indicator. Its existence and comprehensiveness would measure progress in creating the strong institutions required by SDG 16 to address the violence described in SDG 5.

• Reporting Rate of Violence to Authorities

  The article implies this indicator by stating that “most victims do not report abuse” and that it is a “major ‘hidden crime.'” A low reporting rate suggests a lack of trust in the justice system and barriers to accessing it, which is relevant to Target 16.3. An increase in reporting could indicate improved trust and better institutional response.

4. Summary of SDGs, Targets, and Indicators

Source: koreaherald.com