Exposing Dongguk University: Racialized Sexual Violence, Institutional Betrayal, and Alleged Public Funds Fraud (2016–2025)

BIFF’s Illegal Filming Conviction Isn’t Anomaly — It’s a Window into Korea’s Spy‑Cam Crisis and a Culture of Cover‑Up (edited 2025-09-18T03:18)

On July 18, 2025, the Busan District Court sentenced a Busan International Film Festival (BIFF) staff member to one year in prison for secretly filming sexual intercourse with a colleague without consent, and ordered 40 hours of sexual‑violence treatment. Case coverage: Allkpop: BIFF staffer jailed for illegal filming. Prior reporting shows the personnel action was initially dismissal, later reduced to a six‑month suspension after retrial, drawing criticism from the Korean Film Gender Equality Center (DeunDeun): MK (English): indictment and reduced discipline.

This is not an isolated incident but part of a broader, systemic problem: a nationwide “molka” (spy‑cam) crisis, and institutional patterns that minimize accountability.

The wider context: Korea's spy‑cam epidemic and AI acceleration

Digital escalation: deepfakes target the same campuses

The molka crisis now intersects with Korea's deepfake epidemic. The Hankyoreh reports that deepfake Telegram channels have targeted "70 colleges and universities across the country"—the exact same university spaces where our advocacy documented sexual violence risks. This creates a multi-vector targeting system: illegal filming, deepfake production, and institutional systems that fail to protect survivors all converge on the same campuses. See our analysis: Deepfakes + consent law gaps + drugging + defamation silencing + arts risk + business‑entertainment pipeline.

Korea's AI superpower ambitions without safeguards

President Yoon announced plans to make Korea a "top 3 global AI powerhouse by 2027" with 2 trillion won ($1.5 billion) in computing infrastructure and 65 trillion won in private AI investment. Yet this massive AI expansion proceeds without addressing how Korea's defamation law will interact with AI-generated content, or how automated systems might accelerate existing sexual violence patterns.

The defamation law trap: Korea's criminal defamation framework prosecutes even truthful statements unless deemed in "public interest." When AI systems inevitably generate false or ambiguous claims about individuals, will service providers face criminal liability? More critically, can molka victims be silenced when perpetrators threaten defamation charges for truthful testimony about illegal filming?

In short: illegal filming is a structural problem amplified by digital acceleration and legal silencing. When it appears inside BIFF, it reflects broader impunity—not just one person's crime.

Institutional history at BIFF: allegations, resignations, investigations

Campus bathrooms and the reality of “inspection schedules”

Following our viral documentation on Xiaohongshu, a user noted bathroom “inspection date” signs for women’s restrooms at Dongguk University and worried about hidden cameras (screenshot placeholders below). Our response on Xiaohongshu explained why Dongguk University’s inspection interval is dangerously inadequate:

To illustrate the concern students raised, here is the original Xiaohongshu post (full page), followed by a close-up of the wall hole referenced in the comments below.

Xiaohongshu full page (redacted)

Xiaohongshu wall-hole close-up (redacted)

用户评论（Xiaohongshu）：什么瓜 还有我之前在经营馆女洗手间看到过小孔 ["What's going on? Also, I previously saw small holes in the women's restroom of the business building."]

Why this matters for students in film programs (BIFF ↔ universities)

BIFF’s recent conviction lands in an ecosystem where international students in arts/film programs already face extreme exposure to sexual violence. The Korean Women’s Development Institute (2020) found 61.5% of women in arts programs experience sexual violence; film tracks rank at the highest risk. Our viral XHS threads capture testimonies of racialized sexual violence, inappropriate admissions conduct, and ongoing peer exploitation: see this overview with screenshots and metrics: Viral Xiaohongshu evidence overview (Dongguk)

As external acknowledgement of the gravity, a Canadian diplomat responded to our outreach noting, “We understand the sensitivity of the matter and the concerns you have.” See the redacted reply shared here: tweet link.

At Dongguk University—whose film school overlaps culturally and professionally with the industry—the pattern includes alleged cover‑ups and misleading public representations. We have now identified a second falsified Canadian partnership on Dongguk’s official page, while UBC does not list Dongguk on its “Current partnerships” roster. Evidence and archives: Dongguk–UBC partnership falsification: evidence and archives. This matters because false legitimacy attracts foreign students into high‑risk pipelines without accurate safety signals.

Policy visibility and transparency gap (BIFF website)

As of 2025‑09‑15, BIFF’s official English website does not surface a publicly visible anti‑harassment/anti‑sexual‑violence policy in its primary navigation (it emphasizes programming, schedules, accreditation, and events). For a festival rebuilding trust after recent harassment scandals, the absence of an easily discoverable code of conduct, reporting channels, and safety policy is a material governance gap that can deter participation—especially among women and international guests. Source: BIFF official site – English.

How defamation law enables molka impunity

Korea's criminal defamation framework creates perfect conditions for molka perpetrators to silence victims:

This explains why the BIFF case is exceptional—most molka incidents never reach prosecution because victims are legally intimidated into silence. The 2% incarceration rate for spy-cam crimes reflects not just judicial leniency, but systematic legal deterrence of victim testimony.

Terminology and reality

Per the Korean government's own statistics and survivor accounts, these are not "misconduct" glitches. They are sexual violence crimes, including illegal filming, coercion, and racialized targeting of foreign women. Euphemisms minimize harm; accountability requires precision.

What BIFF and partners must do now

  1. Adopt zero‑tolerance policies backed by independent, survivor‑safe reporting channels, not internal discretion alone
  2. Publish investigation outcomes and disciplinary actions in anonymized but specific form; end the practice of silent reductions on appeal
  3. Conduct electronic anti‑spy‑cam sweeps at all venues and affiliated accommodations; verify with third‑party audits
  4. Require university partners and internship providers to demonstrate anti‑grooming controls and bathroom security protocols
  5. Align festival sponsorships with measurable anti‑exploitation standards
  6. Publish a public, versioned Code of Conduct; anti‑harassment/anti‑sexual‑violence policy; clear incident reporting process; and onsite safety plan—linked from the top‑level navigation in Korean and English

Sources and documentation