The recent Seoicho Elementary School teacher incident, also known as the 'Red Card Incident', and the murder of an elementary school student, all share a common social phenomenon. This is the formation of emotional public opinion without sufficient confirmation of the facts of the incident, and as a result, policy responses are made hastily.

Following the Seoicho incident, the strengthening of teachers' rights emerged as a social issue, and teacher organizations organized large-scale protests, reinforcing the frame that teachers are being treated unfairly. However, police investigations revealed that the cause of the incident was not the persistent abuse of a particular parent, but a complex mix of stress and personal reasons. Despite this, teacher organizations actively used emotional public opinion to highlight the incident as a representative case of infringement of teachers' rights, even before the facts were clearly revealed.

This approach was also evident in the 'Red Card Incident'. A frame of 'abuse' was automatically applied to a parent's complaint about a particular teacher, and even after the truth was clearly revealed, the attitude of not revising or explaining the initial frame persisted. As a result, parents were unfairly harmed by false information, and some teachers were investigated by law enforcement agencies, even having to send apology letters to parents and request settlements. Those who initially responded to false information and false agitation contributed to the spread of emotional framing, ultimately resulting in unfair harm to parents. Who is responsible for these outcomes? Can it simply be attributed to individual parents? The damage caused by emotional public opinion based on false information poses a great risk of leading to the collapse of social trust.

A similar phenomenon was seen in the murder of an elementary school student. The incident, in which an elementary school student was brutally sacrificed, has led to the promotion of the 'Heaven's Law'. The bill is being discussed to limit the professional rights of mental patients to prevent recidivism. However, such discussions can also be seen as results strongly reflecting emotional sympathy and fear, and if promoted without sufficient review, they are likely to cause other social problems.

The policy of restricting the professional rights of mental patients can have various side effects. For example, if people who are properly managing mental disorders and living socially are subjected to professional restrictions, they may avoid treatment and hide in the shadows. In addition, limiting the professional participation of mental patients can make their economic independence difficult, which is likely to increase social burden in the long term. Furthermore, the stigma effect on mental patients may intensify, making it even more difficult to diagnose and treat mental disorders early.

In this way, the Seoicho incident, the Red Card incident, and the murder of an elementary school student may seem like contrasting incidents, but what they all have in common is the promotion of incorrect policies due to strong psychological synchronization and inflammatory framing. All these incidents that took place in elementary schools can easily fall prey to those who engage in inflammatory framing, as they psychologically synchronize the anxiety that they could happen to any elementary school teacher or parent.

Of course, the goals of protecting teachers' rights and preventing crime are legitimate, but we should not overlook the risk that policies hastily created by emotional public opinion may actually cause new problems. Rather than being swept away by short-term emotional demands, it is crucial to prepare practical measures through more thorough review and discussion.