Supreme Court: Disciplinary Action Excessive for Students Failing to Report Staying Within 300m of COVID-19 High-Risk Areas

A student who was disciplined for not properly informing the school that he had gone to a restaurant 300 meters away from a gathering site with infection concerns during the height of the COVID-19 pandemic was granted relief through a lawsuit.

The disciplinary action was deemed excessive due to procedural defects, such as the absence of a disciplinary committee member who was required to attend, and because the distance from the gathering site was too far to consider there was a substantial risk of infection. During the trial, a key issue was whether the plaintiff had a legal interest in confirming the invalidity of the disciplinary action after he had already graduated during the first trial.

Supreme Court, Seocho-dong, Seoul.

According to the legal community on the 15th, the Supreme Court's 2nd Division (Presiding Justice Cho Jae-yeon) dismissed the appeal in the disciplinary invalidation confirmation lawsuit filed by Song against YBMJIS Co., Ltd., thereby upholding the lower court's ruling that invalidated the disciplinary action against Song.

The court stated, "Although the disciplinary action in this case pertains to a past legal relationship, the lawsuit seeking confirmation of the invalidity of this disciplinary action aims to secure objective evidence necessary to request correction of the school record containing the disciplinary details. Since this is closely related to the current rights or legal status recorded in the school record, and obtaining a declaratory judgment on this legal relationship is an effective and appropriate means to remove risks or anxieties regarding current rights or legal status, the legal interest to seek confirmation is recognized."

It added, "Although there are some parts of the lower court's reasoning that are somewhat inappropriate, the lower court's judgment that there is a legal interest in seeking confirmation of the invalidity of this disciplinary action is justified, and there is no error affecting the judgment such as misunderstanding the law regarding the interest in confirmation as argued in the grounds for appeal."

Song, who was attending the Korean International School Jeju Campus High School operated by YBMJIS, was staying at his home in Seoul during the COVID-19 pandemic when classes were conducted online. On August 15, 2020, he had lunch with his mother at an Indian restaurant in Jongno-gu, Seoul.

At that time, Pastor Jeon Kwang-hoon of Sarang Jeil Church was holding a large-scale gathering at Gwanghwamun Square, violating quarantine rules, which was about 300 meters away from the restaurant.

After school reopened and Song attended in person, he answered "No" twice to the question "Have you or any family members visited an area with multiple COVID-19 infections within the last 14 days?" in the 'Health and Travel History Survey' conducted by the school to prevent COVID-19 transmission.

However, health authorities confirmed through the base station data of Song and his mother that they had stayed near the gathering site for more than 30 minutes on the day of the event. They sent a text message to Song's mother advising her to get tested for free at a nearby public health center if she had suspicious symptoms or wished to be tested, and conveyed the same message to Song by phone.

Song consulted with his mother by phone and did not change his previous answer; he also answered "No" to the same question in the next survey.

Song's dormitory friends learned that he had received a call from health authorities, and eventually this fact was reported to the school. The school then kept Song in the dormitory and sent him home.

Although Song tested negative in subsequent tests, the school had to switch to online classes from September 1 to September 4, 2020, due to Song's situation.

The school held a disciplinary committee and imposed a two-day suspension on Song, citing that his false answers to the COVID-19 related survey endangered the school's safety. However, the school considered the two-day suspension period fulfilled by the days Song was sent home on August 31, 2020, and the day of the disciplinary committee on September 8 of the same year.

Song's legal representatives, his parents, filed a lawsuit on October 15, 2020, on his behalf against the school corporation, seeking confirmation that the disciplinary action was invalid. Song graduated from the school on May 22, 2021, during the first trial.

In court, the school argued that since Song had already graduated, he had no legal interest in seeking confirmation of invalidity, and the lawsuit should be dismissed.

However, the first trial court rejected this argument, citing a Supreme Court ruling that generally past legal relationships cannot be the subject of declaratory actions, but if a past legal relationship affects current rights or legal status and obtaining a declaratory judgment is an effective and appropriate means to remove risks or anxieties regarding current rights or legal status, then the declaratory action has an immediate confirmatory interest.

The court stated, "Although the disciplinary action has already been fully executed and the plaintiff has graduated from the school, so the confirmation of invalidity pertains to a past legal relationship,"

and continued, "the disciplinary record is permanently recorded in the defendant's academic management system and may cause disadvantages if the plaintiff advances to higher education or employment in the future. Therefore, the disciplinary action affects current rights or legal status, and obtaining a declaratory judgment is the most effective and appropriate means to remove risks or anxieties. Hence, the lawsuit has a confirmatory interest."

The court found both procedural and substantive defects in the school's disciplinary action against Song and ruled that the disciplinary action was invalid.

Regarding procedural defects, the court noted that according to the school regulations, a disciplinary committee for matters warranting up to the maximum suspension must include the principal and two other ethics committee members, totaling three members. However, only two members attended the disciplinary committee, and an ethics committee member who did not attend was recorded as if present in the disciplinary decision document.

Although the disciplinary decision document bore the signatures of General Operations Director A, the overall school principal B, and the high school principal C that Song attended, Director A did not attend the meeting, and Secretary D, who was not qualified as an ethics committee member, was confirmed to have attended.

The court also pointed out that when Song's side sent emails raising various objections and requesting explanations about the disciplinary action, the school replied with a translation stating "parents, students, and at least three ethics committee members attended the hearing," which was translated and sent as "parents, students, at least two ethics committee members and a Korean administrator attended the meeting."

The court concluded, "Since Secretary D, who is not qualified as an ethics committee member, attended and only Director A, who is qualified, signed, the disciplinary action was decided without a properly constituted disciplinary committee according to school regulations, constituting a procedural defect."

The court also judged that the disciplinary reason based on Song's false answers was unjustified, considering that ▲ the place Song visited was a restaurant about 300 meters away from Gwanghwamun Square, making it highly unlikely he mingled with gathering participants and his movement did not overlap with the gathering site ▲ the text message sent by health authorities to Song's mother merely advised testing if symptoms appeared or if testing was desired ▲ COVID-19 is known to spread through contact, not airborne transmission, and the term "area with multiple COVID-19 infections" generally refers to specific facilities with many confirmed cases.

The court pointed out, "The place where the plaintiff was located is about 300 meters from the gathering site, separated by large buildings, making it physically nearby but sufficiently distinct to be considered a different location," and added, "It is excessive to consider that the school's safety was endangered merely because the plaintiff was near a gathering site with COVID-19 spread concerns."

It further stated, "From this perspective, there is also a substantive defect in the disciplinary action."

The second trial court also upheld the first trial court's judgment.

However, the second trial court deleted the part of the first trial's reasoning defining "area with multiple COVID-19 infections" in the school's survey and revised it to state, "'The meaning of 'area with multiple infections' is unclear, and it was not certain whether the area adjacent to Gwanghwamun Square fell under this category.'"

Regarding the "interest in confirmation," the second trial court added grounds recognizing the legal interest in the lawsuit, citing that under Article 229(1) of the "Jeju Special Self-Governing Province Establishment and International Free City Development Special Act" (Jeju Special Act), when applying the Elementary and Secondary Education Act to disciplinary actions, school records, and provision of student-related data for students attending international schools, ▲ in certain cases such as selection of students for higher education, data related to academic records can be provided to third parties without the student's or guardian's consent, so Song's disciplinary matters can be provided and utilized by third parties without his consent if legal requirements and procedures are met ▲ the defendant also acknowledged that disciplinary matters involving suspensions or higher must be indicated in university recommendation letters ▲ even though Song has already entered university, it cannot be completely ruled out that he may graduate or withdraw and then advance to another higher education institution.

The Supreme Court also found no problem with the second trial court's judgment invalidating the disciplinary action against Song.

This content was produced with the assistance of AI translation services.