If you use a mart or department store in Seoul, you can use the facility without a quarantine pass.

The 4th Administrative Division of the Seoul Administrative Court (Chief Judge Han Won-kyo) cited some of the applications for suspension of the enforcement of the quarantine pass that were filed against the mayor of Seoul by 1,023 people, including medical figures and religious people, a while ago.

As a result, the effectiveness of the quarantine pass applied to stores, marts, and department stores larger than 3,000 square meters in Seoul will be suspended, and for teenagers aged 12 to 18, the effectiveness of the quarantine pass will be suspended at all 17 types of facilities.

Analyzed court decisions.


The boundary between the public interest and basic rights that can be achieved through quarantine pass measures...

'The mask is torn'

The court acknowledged that there is a public benefit that can be achieved with quarantine pass measures for restaurants and cafes as well as stores, marts, and department stores.

Nevertheless, in the case of restaurants and cafes, the court ruled that the public interest to be achieved was greater than the limited basic rights, but in the case of shops, marts, and department stores, the court found that the degree of restriction on basic rights seemed excessive compared to the public interest to be achieved.

The standard was 'mask'.



The court said, "In the case of restaurants and cafes, it is difficult to wear a mask, so the risk of infection is higher compared to other multi-use facilities. Since the risk is relatively lower than that of cafes, it is necessary to judge differently in the case of restaurants and cafes and in the case of shops, marts, and department stores,” he explained.



In the end, whether or not you can use a mask while using it determines whether the effectiveness of the quarantine pass is maintained or stopped.


Court "Adolescents need to ensure the right to self-determination about their bodies in relation to COVID-19 is greater"

The court decided that adults and adolescents should also be viewed differently.



As mentioned earlier, although there are public benefits from the introduction of the quarantine pass, the quarantine pass applies to "young people between the ages of 12 and 18" who have "remarkably low aggravation rates due to COVID-19 infection" and "no deaths." "It is difficult to see that it is a limit with a reasonable basis," he explained.


In particular, in the case of adolescents, "the need to guarantee the body's right to self-determination to decide whether or not to vaccinate against the corona virus is essential for adults in a situation in which it is not possible to accurately determine adverse reactions due to side effects of vaccines or the long-term effects of vaccination on the body." Compared to the case, it is even bigger.”



In addition, considering that "in the case of adolescents, even if they are infected with COVID-19, the possibility of leading to severe illness is significantly reduced" It doesn't look like it's going to cause anything."


Why only Seoul this time?: Suspension of enforcement should be applied to local governments…

May vary by local body

The applicant in the case sentenced today applied for suspension of the quarantine pass against the Minister of Health and Welfare, the Director of the Korea Centers for Disease Control and Prevention, and the mayor of Seoul.



However, the court held that the administrative disposition that could be subject to the suspension of execution only applies to "the case of directly regulating the specific rights and obligations of citizens or legal relations without the mediation of other enforcement actions."



At the same time, the court said that the Minister of Health and Welfare sent an official letter related to the quarantine pass to the mayor of Seoul, etc. I judged. It means that “directly regulating the specific rights and obligations or legal relations of the people” by sending an official letter from the Minister of Health and Welfare is not enough. The court judged that such a thing happened when the mayor of Seoul prepared a public notice.



In the case of the head of the Korea Centers for Disease Control and Prevention, the court ruled that it could not be subject to a decision to suspend execution based on the same logic.



Therefore, only the measures related to the quarantine pass by the mayor of Seoul were subject to the suspension, and in the case of Seoul alone, the application of the quarantine pass to 12-18 year olds and the application of the quarantine pass to shops, marts, and department stores were suspended.



According to the logic of the court that sentenced today's decision, those who apply for suspension of the quarantine pass in the future will have to file a lawsuit against the head of each local government.

If a new case is received, the court will change. Of course, we will refer to the judgment of the judge that has been sentenced earlier, but since the courts in other cases are not obligated to follow the judgment of the court in this case, there is a possibility that whether or not to suspend the execution of the quarantine pass may vary by local government. there is.



(Design: Jeongyeon Kim / Planning/Production: D Contents Planning Department)