Shingate: How Dongguk University Leveraged U.S. Law — Then Ignored Its Values
Link back to the timeline at genderwatchdog.org
In 2007, Dongguk University drew international attention over a scandal that would come to be known as "Shingate." At its center was Shin Jeong-ah , a professor hired in 2005 to teach art history based on what was later discovered to be a forged Yale University Ph.D.
Despite internal doubts, Dongguk proceeded with her hire. Crucially, the university had received a faxed confirmation from Yale — later revealed to be sent in error — that verified Shin's claimed credentials. When the controversy resurfaced in 2007, Yale initially denied having sent the confirmation, only to later acknowledge it had made a mistake.
Dongguk, facing reputational fallout, filed a $50 million defamation lawsuit in U.S. federal court. The university claimed that Yale's error damaged its ability to attract government grants, alumni donations, and support for a new law school initiative 1.
The court dismissed the case. In 2013, the Second Circuit Court of Appeals affirmed that Dongguk failed to prove actual malice or causation of damages , and Yale was not held liable 2.
From Legal Accountability to Institutional Responsibility
What this episode demonstrated is that Dongguk University clearly understands how the U.S. legal system works. It understands that:
- Academic integrity matters.
- Institutional reputation is shaped by how wrongdoing is handled.
- U.S. legal channels exist not only to protect reputations, but also to demand accountability.
Yet today, more than a decade after the Shingate lawsuit, Dongguk faces renewed scrutiny — not over a forged degree, but over its handling of sexual violence risk, gender equity, and institutional transparency.
A Growing Concern: Structural Risks in Film Education
At the time of writing, Dongguk University:
- Has no female faculty in its Graduate School of Film and Digital Media , despite its co-educational enrollment.
- Maintains close relationships with production companies , such as Sidus FNH , that share building space with graduate classrooms — without clear firewalls, independent oversight, or trusted reporting mechanisms for abuse.
- Has not implemented Title IX-aligned protections for its own students — despite having ongoing academic partnerships with U.S. and Canadian institutions , whose students may be put at similar risk abroad.
These issues matter because Title IX , passed in the U.S. in 1972, guarantees that students in educational institutions must not face discrimination on the basis of sex — including sexual violence, coercion, or abuse by faculty or affiliated personnel.
The Double Standard
Dongguk University was willing to invoke U.S. legal protections when its reputation and funding were on the line.
But now, when U.S. values — like gender equity, anti-harassment measures, and student safeguards — are relevant to how it manages its own programs, the university has gone quiet.
This isn't just a legal oversight. It's a case of selective institutional ethics.
The Irony: Reputational Harm Then — And Now
In its lawsuit against Yale, Dongguk claimed the "Shingate" incident caused it to lose credibility, threatening its ability to secure alumni donations, charitable gifts, and institutional growth.
But today, it is knowingly ignoring documented structural vulnerabilities for sexual violence — vulnerabilities that carry far greater reputational and legal risk than the forgery scandal ever did.
The reputational harm they once feared was hypothetical.
The reputational harm they now face is real — and global.
And this time, they cannot blame anyone else.
Time to Reaffirm Core Values
As this international advocacy campaign gathers momentum, Dongguk University must ask itself:
- Will it modernize its hiring practices to reflect gender balance and fair representation?
- Will it establish independent, transparent structures to address sexual violence and misconduct — especially where academic and industry lines blur?
- Will it live up to the same standards of integrity and accountability it once expected from others?
The legacy of Shingate should have been about learning from institutional failure.
If Dongguk continues to evade necessary reform, the message is clear:
It has learned nothing at all.
📎 Further Reading