A South Korean court has held the city of Gumi liable for damages after it unilaterally canceled a concert by singer Lee Sang-hyun, ruling that the city’s actions infringed on freedom of expression and conscience. The Seoul Central District Court partially ruled in favor of Lee, his agency Dream Factory, and 100 ticket holders who had filed a lawsuit against Gumi city and Mayor Kim Jang-ho.
The court ordered Gumi city to pay Lee 35 million won (approximately $29,000), Dream Factory 75 million won, and 1.5 million won (15,000 won per person) to each ticket holder, amounting to a total of about 125 million won (around $104,000) in damages. The ruling found that the city’s demand for Lee to submit a pledge not to engage in political speech prior to the concert was unlawful.
The canceled event was Lee’s 35th-anniversary concert titled “Heaven,” originally scheduled for December 25, 2024, at the Gumi Cultural and Arts Center. The cancellation followed protests in Gumi, a conservative-leaning city, sparked by Lee’s comments supporting the impeachment of President Yoon Suk-yeol during a prior performance in Seoul. On December 20, Gumi city asked Lee to sign a written pledge affirming he would refrain from making politically charged statements or causing political misunderstanding. Lee refused to sign the document, prompting Mayor Kim to announce the cancellation on December 23, citing safety concerns.
The court ruled that requiring the pledge was neither stipulated as a condition for the venue rental nor appropriate, emphasizing that the clause effectively restricted Lee’s freedom of expression. It noted that the pledge sought to prevent political interpretation of Lee’s statements regardless of his intent, constituting an undue limitation on artistic and civic participation.
This decision marks a significant recognition by the court that Gumi’s actions amounted to a form of prior censorship. It also compensates not only the artist but also the audience members who suffered psychological harm from being denied the performance. However, the court declined to hold Mayor Kim personally liable, citing legal principles that protect public officials from personal responsibility in the absence of intentional or gross negligence. Critics argue this exemption raises questions, especially as elected officials’ decisions result in taxpayers bearing the financial burden of damages.
The ruling has been welcomed by advocates of artistic freedom and civil liberties as an affirmation of constitutional rights in the realm of cultural expression. It also serves as a caution against governmental overreach in regulating political content in artistic performances.