Kaohsiung Court Orders NT$6,544 Compensation in Cram School Dispute Where 9-Year-Olds Injured Each Other

(CNA, Kaohsiung, 20th) Two elementary school students in Kaohsiung got into a dispute over seating space at a cram school, where one student who kicked and poked another was subsequently scratched on the face. The injured student's parents filed a lawsuit demanding NT$500,000 in compensation, but the Kaohsiung District Court ruled that the injured student had attacked first and ordered the accused student to pay NT$6,544. According to the Kaohsiung District Court's verdict, the two elementary school students were attending class at the same table in a Kaohsiung cram school in February 2025 when a dispute arose over the space between their seats. The injured student's parents claimed that the accused student had voluntarily moved to the adjacent seat and then proceeded to strike their child's head and pierce their thigh with hard objects like a pencil. They alleged that the accused student ultimately used a sharp object to puncture the left temple, causing lacerations and abrasions on the injured student's left cheek, which required stitches and left a permanent scar. Based on this, they sought a total of NT$500,000 for medical expenses and emotional distress. The accused student and their parents countered in court, arguing that the conflict began with verbal provocations from the injured student, who then kicked the accused's knee five times with such force that the desk and chair moved. The injured student then allegedly used a pencil to rapidly stab downward at the accused student's right forearm, causing a puncture wound. The accused student claimed that their hands were being held down and, in the process of trying to break free and counter-attack, they accidentally scratched the other student's face, with no malicious intent. They also argued that the injured student's father later verbally abused the accused student for 20 minutes at the cram school's front desk, which substantially compensated for any emotional distress, and they filed a counterclaim for NT$500,000 to offset any potential damages. After reviewing surveillance footage, the Kaohsiung District Court judge found that while the conflict was initiated by the accused student drawing on the injured student's textbook with a pencil, this only caused a stain and did not amount to property damage. In contrast, the injured student subsequently engaged in more intense actions, including continuous kicking and poking the accused's forearm with a pencil tip, which caused a rapid escalation of the conflict. Furthermore, during the latter part of the struggle, the two were on their seats with their hands locked, pushing and twisting, which made the desk and chair unstable. This caused the accused student's body to lean towards the injured student, and only then did the pencil in their right hand scratch the left cheek in a downward motion. The judge noted that if the seat had not tilted from the struggle, the original distance between them would have made it impossible to scratch the face, proving the accused student had no malicious intent to injure or disfigure. The judge considered that both students were only 9 years old at the time, and a teacher was present in the cram school classroom. They could have sought help when the conflict arose but instead resorted to retaliatory actions like kicking and stabbing with a pencil, neither of which could be considered self-defense. Furthermore, the injured student's persistent attacks had a greater impact on the escalation of damages. Considering the motives, means, and causal relationship of both parties, the court found that the injured student