<![CDATA[Bullying in educational institutions frequently leaves victims with prolonged psychological trauma, yet sanctions against education-providing legal entities remain confined to administrative measures such as written warnings, accreditation deferral, or licence revocation. This pattern produces institutional impunity: the entity benefits from its operations but escapes criminal law even when it is shown to have tolerated violence. The article addresses two questions. First, how the attribution of criminal liability for omissions in bullying mitigation can be reconstructed through Identification Theory within Articles 45–50 of the 2023 Criminal Code. Second, how the juridical parameters of systemic negligence can be formulated through Corporate Culture Theory as a basis for criminal liability for violations of students’ psychological integrity. Employing normative legal research with statutory, conceptual, comparative (the Philippines, Japan, South Korea), and case approaches, the study finds that Articles 45–50 already provide a sufficient legal entrance for corporate attribution. Operationalising it requires combining Identification Theory, to identify whose negligence is attributable to the corporation, with Corporate Culture Theory, to articulate the systemic standards whose breach constitutes institutional fault. Systemic negligence is framed through four cumulative elements: a duty of care, a gross and systemic breach, a meaningful causal link, and a constitutive consequence in the form of clinically documented violations of psychological integrity.]]>
