Documentary film K-Number delves into Korean adoption through historical facts and personal stories | by Martha Vickery (Winter 2026)

South Korean documentary filmmaker Seyoung Jo told a packed room at the University of Minnesota, after a recent showing of her new film K-Number, that when planning for screenings of her film in the U.S., she specifically asked to show her film in Minnesota.
The reason? She had met a lot of Minnesotan Korean adoptees in researching and filming two films about transnational adoption in South Korea, and knew there were a high concentration of Korean adoptees here, many of whom have lived and worked in South Korea, and have belonged to or led adoptee organizations there.
K-Number digs deep into a timely topic – how the recent revelation about fraud and mismanagement of adoption has its roots in South Korean history, and how that history reverberates into the lives of adult Korean adoptees today.
The title K-Number comes from a numbering system that ostensibly kept track of a majority (but not all) Korean overseas adoptees. The film describes the numbering of human beings for export, which is one piece of the narrative; the administrative structures, policies, and official records that the film attempts to explain. The term also represents the individuality of hundreds of thousands, scattered to many places, who built lives elsewhere, and have come together from many countries to reclaim their human dignity on a world stage. While “K-Number” refers to a dehumanizing system, it also symbolizes the unity and resilience of a group of people.

South Korean international adoption in the headlines
A recent admission by the South Korean government concerning international adoption history made headlines globally – that the degree of fraud found in the adoption records of transnational adoptees constitutes a human rights crime under South Korean law. The new president of South Korea, Jae Myung Lee, formalized this revelation in an official apology on behalf of the government to Korean adoptees, delivered in an October 2025 speech.
The emerging revelations about the adoption system in South Korea have made Jo’s research and her recent documentary film a hot topic in both South Korea and the U.S.
Jo, who has made film documentaries on human rights issues all her life, has an interest in the issue of South Korea’s international adoption spanning 20 years. She directed her first film, Made in Korea, in 2004, about Korean adoptees who were returning to South Korea to live and work.
Jo did an interview on February 10, the day of her film event in Minneapolis, halfway through a month-long U.S. tour with her film. She was assisted by translator Deborah Yoon, a Ph.D. researcher at the University of Minnesota’s Department of Psychology.
During the recent tour in the U.S., K-Number was screened in Boston and at a venue near Washington, D.C., prior to the Minneapolis showing. The filmmaker traveled with her film to do interviews and audience Q and As after each showing. After the Minneapolis event, she showed the film at Northwestern University (in partnership with Korean Adoptees of Chicago) and then to California for a screening for the Association of Korean Adoptees of San Francisco (AKASF).

A career of human rights filmmaking
Jo had an intense interest in film starting around 2001 while in college. She calls herself a “bad student” for her disinterest in anything beyond making films with her fellow film club members. The first film, on which she assisted, looked at the faulty 1987 presidential election, when military dictator Do-Hwan Chun lost to Tae-woo Noh in 1987, just before South Korea hosted the Olympics in 1988.
After college, in 2024, Jo directed a film about Korean adoptees who were returning to Korea to live and work. Her film (now listed in English as Made in Korea in most filmographies) also delves into the suspected corruption in the process. However, no one was aware of widespread records fraud at that time, she said, however, the film does convey how adoptees searching for birth family were denied access to their own records by their adoption agencies.
She also directed Variety Survival Talk Show(2009), on the stories of sexual assault survivors. Her third feature-length documentary, Let’s Dance (2013), focuses on abortion in South Korea.
Decades of frustration
There is an oblique reference to Made in Korea in the beginning scene of K-Number, where the viewer hears a conversation, which becomes more heated, between a Korean adoptee man and a woman who is an adoption agency staff member. The woman is apparently paging through the man’s file, and refusing to show it to him or let him have a copy of certain pages he asks about.
Jo explained that the (audio only) conversation was from the 2004 Made in Korea, and hints darkly at the frustration of adoptees who have pled for records access for decades. That kind of scenario, with agencies holding onto records and citing confidentiality, and adoptees pleading for access to their own information, happened in 2004 and was still happening when Jo was filming for K-Number.
One adoptee’s story, and a dose of history
At the beginning of the film, the viewer has an up-close introduction to Mioka Kim Miller, a U.S. Korean adoptee who is doing a birth search in Seoul. The viewer soon learns that this is only the most recent of several trips Miller has taken to South Korea to search for her birth parents – the first one was in 2009.
Mioka reveals that she remembers leaving her home to search for her mother. She has only a hazy recollection of her mother leaving their home, and does not remember why. She can vaguely remember a few details of her home – a place with a courtyard and a closed entrance with a security guard. At one point, she takes a photo of a place like that. At one point, she relates that she blames herself for getting lost, even though she was so young she can barely remember what she was doing, or why.
Her search has been impeded many times by having access blocked to her files. She obtains a redacted record from a children’s home in which she was first placed, but the record does not reveal the city where she was found, only a neighborhood name. She believes the record could be missing key information due to the many redactions. She is assisted in her search by a Korean women’s group Banet, whose director is interviewed on her knowledge of the search process.
She eventually obtains the same record, unredacted, toward the end of the story, with no explanation for the prior redactions. She gets the record apparently only because of her persistence and the intervention of the experts helping her.
Mioka also describes leaving her adoptive parents’ home as a teenager for good after being “kicked out” by adoptive parents who never loved her. She also describes how, in her papers and mementos of her adoption, she once found a filled-out application form for U.S. citizenship, apparently completed by her adoptive parents but never sent. On her own as an older teen, she finished high school, worked and attended beauty college part time, and eventually established her own business. She eventually hired an immigration attorney to obtain her U.S. citizenship.
Mioka’s story was helpful for the film narrative in many ways, Jo explained. Her repeat visits to Korea showed how missing and inaccurate records can make a birth search nearly impossible, even with the expert help from the Banet organization. That she discovered as an adult that she was never made a citizen brings the U.S. bureaucratic failures into focus. Mioka’s demeanor was also a factor in advancing the story. Diplomatic and polite at all times, her persistence and focus on her search brings out the illogic of the system she is trying to work with.
A continuum of life experiences
Jo said her experiences meeting many adoptees has taught her that “everyone’s experience is so different.” She shows that in the stories of other Korean adoptees she follows in K-Number, including Dana and Mary Schlafman, a married couple, both Korean adoptees. They both come up empty in their search for birth parents.
The Schlafmans’ musing on a way of reclaiming and honoring their fellow Korean adoptees was the inspiration for the film title. Mary explains that earlier adoptees were numbered differently, and that there are an unknown number of people who were adopted informally, but the K-numbers, used to number most Korean adoptees, could be a key. Dana explains that the nearly 3,000 people’s names depicted on the 9/11 memorial are findable by using a digital number linked to a grid. He imagines a similar memorial that would honor all Korean adoptees.
The story of Kaylin Bower describes another kind of birth parent reunion. Kaylin successfully locates her birth mother (with the help of the Banet group) and meets her a few times with a translator. However, Kaylin’s birth mother (who is never shown) tells Kaylin to go back to her adoptive family, and to not visit her again. During the uncomfortable meetings, the viewer hears what the translator is telling Kaylin, a softer version of the translation seen on the screen in subtitles.
In the end, Kaylin agrees not to pursue the relationship, telling her birth mother “I understand,” but the subtext is more like “I don’t understand.” Back at her hotel, Kaylin talks to her little son on a video call – he is in a silly mood. His bright voice comes through on the speaker, and Kaylin tries to match his enthusiasm. “Maybe you can come with me next time,” she tells him.
Linking past and present
K-Number is more comprehensive than a few adoptees’ stories. It takes on a wide spectrum or legal, governmental, moral and emotional issues wrapped into South Korea’s international adoption system. It reports in some depth on the adoption bureaucracy, which necessitates explanations of some key points in Korean history, with contemporaneous documents, photos and film footage.
One of the film’s strengths is in the linking of events in South Korean modern history to the present predicament of adoptees. In telling the stories of Mioka and several other adoptees, it digs into how records access problems and the puzzling bureaucracy of international adoption are affecting adoptees today – how it costs them money, time and much misery. It also highlights how every adoptee’s story is unique.
An unlikely champion for adoptee human rights
Despite some enthusiastic advocacy between 2004 and 2017 for greater records access by returnee Korean adoptees, Jo said, there was very little movement on the issue. What changed in 2017 was U.S. adoptee Adam Crapser’s human rights lawsuit against the Holt Agency and the South Korean government for his deportation from the U.S. to South Korea. (see 2016 feature story in the KQ archive section)
During the era of the late ‘90s to early 2000s, deported adoptees were in the news because they were in crisis after being deported to a country they did not know. In that era, Jo said “there was reporting of deported adoptees dying on the streets.” One adoptee, Phillip Clay, died by suicide in South Korea in 2017. In Korea, it brought the plight of deportees into sharp relief. In the U.S., Clay’s death prompted some nationwide pro-citizenship advocacy, including a bill to ensure automatic citizenship for adoptees.
Jo said she was initially interested in the question of U.S. Korean adoptees and their citizenship issues, but that question prompted the research that eventually became the K-Number film. The film briefly describes Crapser’s lawsuit, which he initially partially won. In an interview, Crapser plainly expresses his disgust for both the U.S. government that deported him, and the South Korean government that offered no help to acclimate to a new country. After the initial court case, Holt was ordered to pay him 100 million won (around $75,000) for damages. However, Holt never paid. Instead, it appealed; the Associated Press reported in January (2026) that Holt and the South Korean government won the appeal.
The appeals court ruled that neither Holt nor the government were responsible for Crapser’s lack of citizenship. On appeal, Holt cited a 1970s law, passed during military dictatorship and intended to speed up international adoptions, which absolved the government of responsibility for ensuring adoptees were made citizens of their new country. While Crapser lost his case, that he was able to bring the case at all was significant, Jo explained, and it paved the way for further action by adoptees, which the K-Number film links together.
Significantly, a group of Danish adoptees, the Danish Korean Rights Group (DKRG) filed a suit in 2022, claiming that the government abused overseas adoptees’ human rights in the way it mishandled their adoptions. Although it is an important and emerging part of the Korean adoptee rights story, the film wrapped up around the time the case was taking shape in 2023.
The South Korean government turned it over to its own human rights investigatory body, the Truth and Reconciliation Commission (TRC). K-Number includes some footage of the TRC hearings. However, the film was completed long before the TRC published bombshell findings in March 2025 that the historic treatment of Korean adoptees constitutes a human rights abuse under South Korean law.
The South Korean government in 2025 charged the TRC with administering a third round of investigation. That investigation will move ahead in late February.
The seven-year project
At the beginning of her work, Jo dug deep into the history, financing, and politics of Korean international adoption, and met many experts. Wading through the facts and history for nearly four years, she could include only a small percent of what she learned in the film. “The information was scattered,” she said, “and it took a long time to put the pieces together.”
Finding funding for her independent production was also challenging, and stretched the timeline.
Jo started filming in 2019. She followed and filmed adoptees doing birth searches in Korea. The editing process took about 10 months, but the film was ready in time for the Busan Film Festival in 2024, where it won an audience popularity award. In 2025, the film was distributed to about 150 movie theaters nationwide. “The whole process was about seven years of work,” she said.
Targeting her work, busting some assumptions
The target viewership “is Korean people who are not really familiar with Korean adoption and do not see it in their everyday lives,” Jo explained, “it was important to figure out how to remove the most complex stories, but give enough information so that they can understand.”
Jo showed the final cut of the film to six different levels of focus groups, she said – from the most informed experts on Korean adoption to groups of ordinary Koreans who knew next to nothing about the topic. Then she edited again, with the goal of making the film understandable to all the groups, and believes it was worth the time.
Jo also wanted the film to offer facts to counter the stereotypical view of international adoption. “The shortcut narrative among Koreans is that ‘the mother threw away the child, so the child got adopted,’’” she said. That story is told commonly about Korean single moms in the 1980s and ‘90s, she added. In understanding overseas adoptions prior to the ‘80s, she added, people believe the motivation for adoption to be post-war poverty.
Jo believes that the common point of view was dished out to the general public by “the government, the adoption agencies and at that time, the churches that were involved.” People from other countries think similarly about international adoption also, she believes.
Additionally, while a majority believe Korean international adoption happened mainly in the ‘60s, when poverty was widespread, in reality “much of the adoption was happening in the ‘80s up to the time of the [1988] Olympics, when economy was strong,” Jo pointed out.
According to statistics she has read, among Korean adoptees who begin a birth search, less than one percent reach the goal of finding a birth parent. “But because what they show on TV is successful reunions, people believe many are successful – that the rates [of success] are much higher.” Most successful reunions are accomplished through a DNA match, or because adoptees use the media, she said. Few are accomplished by using adoption records.
In the traditional depiction of adoptee and birth parent meeting, a reunion is a beautiful thing, Jo said, “with lots of hugging and crying and happiness that we are all together.” The viewer rarely sees the negatives of the process; the searches that turn up nothing, or the search followed by a reunion with a negative outcome of some kind, like Kaylin’s experience. There are successful reunions after which the relationship does not develop. “Time separates them, and trying to build relationship results in conflict,” she observed.
Korean adoptees also go to Korea for many reasons other than birth searches, which many Korean nationals do not understand, she commented. “In most cases, it is not about just finding their mom. It’s about learning the language, the culture, things they don’t know or can’t remember, learning what it’s like to live in Korea, how people live and express themselves, and so many multiple factors,” she said.
A couple hundred children in Korea are still placed for international adoption annually, Jo added. “In the present day, although the economy will certainly support a couple hundred kids per year, they are still adopted internationally. Like, because they created the system, they are stuck,” she said. “They do say lately that they will stop international adoption in 2029, but others ask ‘why are we waiting?’”
After many years of puzzling out its intricacies, Jo has learned that Korea’s huge system of international adoption, which operated for many decades, went largely unchallenged. Receiving nations failed to scrutinize the system, even looking the other way. The results affected hundreds of thousands of people globally. As a matter of restoring justice, it will not be resolved quickly.
As societies involved in international adoption, Jo suggested it will take time to work together on a path toward reconciliation. The human rights harms affected many who were unaware – not only adoptees, but birth parents and adoptive parents. “People need to think this through, and not continue to make the assumption that these were certain individual cases,” she said. “We have to look at this as a bigger picture.”
Editor’s note: Filmmaker Seyoung Jo told the audience during the Q and A after the screening that she hopes her month-long February trip will be an impetus for the film to be screened elsewhere in the U.S. The distribution company Sunbo Film reported that the film is available for community screenings (contact sunbofilm2022@gmail.com for further information). Any additional U.S. screening dates will be announced through the official K-Number Instagram account.




























