Legal Rights for Foreigners, circa the American 1850's?

I guess using the historical example of American chattel slavery as an example is rhetorically extreme, in that none of us Americans are working under conditions of bondage, but did you ever think about what it means that your testimony as a foreigner, in case you have to defend yourself legally, is essentially meaningless against a Korean's? You should know:

-- The police regularly ignore the testimony of foriegners as invalid. A cop in my recent case even said that it was "meaningless" to accept the story of my American friend, and that it was "a good thing you had a Korean with you" since hers was the only testimony that could help me, despite the obvious fact that she was in my party. I guess her imagined impartiality as a pureblood Korean outweighs her likely partiality to me personally. Lovely.

-- Another foreigner told me of having been sued for libel and when asked to testify, a translator was not allowed to hear his statement in court. Meaning, it was rendered effectively meaningless.

-- I'm told by those involved in legal cases here that this is the case.

-- I've seen with my own eyes a Korean hooker who attacked a group of girls whom she didn't like, then claim she was attacked first. Against a crowd of Korean onlookers who hadn't even been there when I saw the attack start, my testimony was completely ignored. In fact, I was made to wait outside the police station and had to DEMAND that they accept my written statement, which they did only after they marveled, "You can write in Korean?"

Indeed, as King Sejong said about learning Korean, "a wise man" could allegedly learn it in a day, and even "a fool" could in "a fortnight." I guess if I'm speaking fluent Korean and the KKK (Korean Keystone Kops) are marveling that I can write what the Korean government always refers to as "the world's most scientific alphabet" and claims is the "easiest to learn," that would make me a drooling idiot.

So, if it's true that a drunk man with no job, no cellphone, who lives in a boarding house, can randomly say I kicked him and drag me into this legal morass to the point that I have to prove that I DID NOT hit him (whereas the real burden of proof legally should fall on him to actively PROVE THAT I DID), basically, because he's Korean, and my testimony is worthless against his in this his-word-against-mine case, I'm GUILTY UNTIL I CAN PROVE OTHERWISE.

And since it's my status as a foreigner that has placed me in this precarious legal position, and I'm told that the foreigner witnesses, no matter how many, invariably don't count against even one Korean, I am inevitably reminded of the American Slave Codes, circa the 1850's: “

It is an inflexible and universal rule of slave law, founded in one or two States upon usage, in others sanctioned by express legislation, THAT THE TESTIMONY OF A COLORED PERSON, WHETHER BOND OR FREE, CANNOT BE RECEIVED AGAINST A WHITE PERSON." (citation)

Am I being extreme in asking whether this sentiment would describe the inner thoughts of many in this society, and the legal chances of most foreigners in a Korean court of law?

Foreigners are "beings of an inferior order, and altogether unfit to associate with the Korean race, either in social or political relations, and so far inferior that they had no rights which the Korean is bound to respect."

Anyone know where that adapted quote finds its origins? Quick! American History pop quiz!