Ju Young Um

Introduction

Dr Ju Young Um is a doctor formerly registered with the General Medical Council (GMC number 7492397) whose career ended after he was convicted of 23 voyeurism offences at Glasgow Sheriff Court on 10 April 2025. The offences involved the covert recording of 28 victims — 19 adult males and 9 adult females, including 9 couples — in the bedrooms and bathrooms of three addresses over a period of approximately three years. In February 2026, a Medical Practitioners Tribunal Service (MPTS) tribunal found that his fitness to practise was impaired by reason of his conviction and directed that his name be erased from the medical register, taking him off the register entirely.

Background Information

Between 7 November 2020 and 23 August 2023, Dr Um installed and covertly used recording equipment to film people without their knowledge or consent. The locations were the bedrooms and bathrooms of three addresses: two at his home and one in hospital staff accommodation. According to the determination, hidden recording equipment was placed in air fresheners and smoke alarms in advance, and the offending only stopped when he was reported to the police. Approximately 130 recordings were retrieved from his phone, laptop and a storage device. The victims were 19 adult males and 9 adult females, with the latter group including 9 couples filmed together. The conduct continued, on the tribunal’s later finding, over approximately three years before the police became involved.

The Controversy or Incident That Led to Their Cancellation

Adjudicated vs. alleged. The conviction of 10 April 2025 and the sentence of 8 May 2025 are court-adjudicated criminal facts recorded by Glasgow Sheriff Court. By contrast, the tribunal’s conclusions that Dr Um’s offending was persistent, premeditated, predatory, an abuse of his professional position, and that his fitness to practise is impaired and the risk of repetition high, are findings made on the civil standard by an MPTS tribunal — regulatory findings, not criminal adjudications. It was further admitted before the tribunal, not merely alleged, that the conviction and sentence occurred as described: Dr Um admitted the entirety of the Allegation.

It was alleged, and admitted, that on 10 April 2025 at Glasgow Sheriff Court Dr Um was convicted of multiple counts of voyeurism under Section 9 of the Sexual Offences (Scotland) Act 2009. On 8 May 2025 he was sentenced to 18 months’ imprisonment, a 9-month extended sentence, and a 10-year notification requirement under the Sexual Offences Act 2003, requiring him to notify his details to the police for a decade.

At the substantive hearing, held from 23 to 25 February 2026, the Tribunal found that the conviction engaged the statutory ground of impairment under section 35C(2)(c) of the Medical Act 1983 and that his conduct amounted to a serious departure from paragraphs 1, 3 and 65 of Good Medical Practice (2013). It assessed the seriousness as being at the high end of the spectrum, noting that the offending was persistent and repeated over approximately three years, premeditated, predatory, and that the offences committed in hospital accommodation amounted to an abuse of his professional position.

The Tribunal found Dr Um’s insight to be very recent and limited — he had only accepted the sexual motivation of his conduct in late 2025 — that he had taken few remedial steps, and that the risk of repetition was high. Among the aggravating features it identified were that the behaviour was persistent and repeated, involving 23 sexual offences against 28 victims including couples and stopping only when he was reported to the police; that the conduct was premeditated and predatory; that the offences in hospital accommodation abused his professional position; and, notably, that his plea of not guilty was an aggravating feature in this case. On that basis it determined that his fitness to practise was impaired by reason of his conviction.

Public Reaction and Consequences

The immediate consequence was the loss of his medical registration. The tribunal directed that Dr Um’s name be erased from the medical register — the outcome commonly described as being struck off — and imposed an immediate order of suspension so that the restriction took effect without delay. The case now forms part of the public record of UK regulatory outcomes: MedicWatch, an independent record of healthcare regulators’ published decisions, lists the erasure on its page for Dr Um, recording the conviction, the sentence and the tribunal’s findings as drawn from the publicly published MPTS determination.

Current Status

Dr Um stands erased from the medical register by decision dated 25 February 2026. Erasure is otherwise indefinite: under the regulator’s framework it can be reviewed after a minimum of five years, but until any such review he is not permitted to practise as a doctor in the UK. The immediate order of suspension was in force from the determination. Separately, the criminal sentence remains: 18 months’ imprisonment with a 9-month extended licence period, and a 10-year notification requirement under the Sexual Offences Act 2003 following his placement on the Sex Offenders’ Register.

Impact on Their Career/Life

The striking-off ends Dr Um’s medical career in the United Kingdom; erasure removes a practitioner from the register entirely and he is no longer permitted to practise the profession. Alongside the professional end, the conviction carries lasting personal consequences: a custodial sentence of 18 months, a 9-month extended licence period after release, and registration on the Sex Offenders’ Register with a 10-year notification requirement. The tribunal’s assessment that his insight remained very recent and limited and that the risk of repetition was high leaves him with an exceptionally poor position should any future application for restoration ever be made.

Sources

• MedicWatch, “Ju Young Um — Struck off the register · 25 February 2026,” 25 February 2026.source