Singer Steve Yoo (Yoo Seung-jun, 49) is gearing up for the appeal of his third administrative lawsuit after being denied a visa once again, despite winning two previous battles in the Supreme Court.
According to legal sources on the 20th, the Seoul High Court’s Administrative 8-2 Division will hold the first hearing for the lawsuit filed by Yoo against the Consulate General in Los Angeles (LA) on July 3 at 11:20 AM.
The controversy dates back to 2002 when Yoo left Korea for an overseas performance after receiving a notice for public service duty and subsequently acquired U.S. citizenship, sparking a draft-dodging scandal. Following this, the Ministry of Justice banned him from entering the country.
Yoo later attempted to enter Korea using an Overseas Korean (F-4) visa, but the LA Consulate General denied the issuance, triggering a long legal fight.
In the first lawsuit, Yoo lost in the first and second trials, but the Supreme Court overturned the ruling, and the subsequent retrial resulted in a victory for Yoo, which was later finalized by the Supreme Court.
However, when Yoo applied for a visa again, the LA Consulate General denied it once more, leading to a second lawsuit. While he lost the first trial, the second trial ruled in his favor, and the decision was finalized by the Supreme Court.
At that time, the second trial court determined that there were issues with how the Consulate General interpreted and applied the legal clauses to deny the visa.
Despite this, the LA Consulate General denied the visa again in June last year, citing the Ministry of Justice’s 2002 entry ban. In response, Yoo filed his third administrative lawsuit in September of the same year.
In August last year, the first trial court once again ruled in favor of Yoo. The court decided that the disadvantage Yoo suffered was excessively large compared to the public interest gained by denying the visa, and that restricting his entry virtually permanently was illegal compared to other cases of draft evasion.
The court stated, “It is difficult to see that Yoo Seung-jun’s presence or activities would pose a threat to the national security, maintenance of order, public welfare, or diplomatic relations of the Republic of Korea,” adding that the third visa denial constituted an abuse of discretionary power.
The court further pointed out that banning entry virtually permanently without a time limit violates the principle of proportionality and constitutes arbitrary discrimination, as there is no fundamental difference between Yoo and other draft evaders.
However, the court added, “This by no means means that Yoo Seung-jun’s past actions were justified or appropriate,” but concluded that considering his level of mature citizenship, his entry or activities are unlikely to pose a substantial threat to the existence and safety of the nation.
Because the LA Consulate General appealed the first trial’s decision, the case is now heading for a second trial judgment.
