Government “Shincheonji innocence, differences in judgment of quarantine and judicial authorities…the law may be amended and punishment in the future”

The court condemned all officials of Shincheonji who were handed over to trial for interfering with the government’s epidemiological investigation of the new coronavirus infection (Corona 19), the government said, “There seems to be a difference between the judgment of the quarantine authorities and the court judgment.” Revealed.

Yoon Tae-ho, head of the Central Accident Recovery Headquarters (heavy water version), at the Corona 19 reporters briefing session on the morning of the 4th, said, “The court decided that failure to submit the list was in the preparation stage of the epidemiological investigation, so it could not be regarded as interference with the epidemiological investigation, and convicted of the first trial “However, on September 29, last year, the law was amended, and if the list was deliberately omitted or the list was not submitted, punishment for refusing to provide information has become possible,” he explained.

On the 4th, the Daegu District Court said, “The request for the submission of a list of all members of the Daegu Church in Shincheonji is not an epidemiological investigation determined by the Infectious Disease Prevention Act and Enforcement Decree, but a preparatory stage for an epidemiological investigation. He has been acquitted for being innocent because it cannot be punished for violation.

“In accordance with the provisions of the Infectious Disease Prevention Act,’Request and Use of Information’, the Commissioner of the KCDC or the local government may request information to be provided if necessary to block infection.” It is based on legal grounds that imprisonment or fines of 20 million won or less can be imposed.

“However, before September 29th, the penal provisions were not applied, so Shincheonji was not applicable to this provision, and the crime was applied to obstruct epidemiological investigations.” “I will tell you that there was a difference in interpretation (between the court and the quarantine authority).” Said.

Article 76-2 of the Infectious Disease Prevention Act (Act on the Prevention and Management of Infectious Diseases), revised in September last year, states that’the head of the disease management administration or mayor/do governor shall be the head of the central administrative agency or the head of the local government when necessary to prevent infectious diseases and block the spread of infection. , Public institutions, medical institutions, pharmacies, corporations, groups, and individuals may be requested to provide the following information on infectious disease patients, etc. and suspected infectious diseases, and the person receiving the request must comply with this.’

Director Yoon said, “Considering that corona 19 is asymptomatic, the quarantine authorities have no choice but to actively interpret it (that there is a possibility of infection in the whole),” he said. “It is not required indefinitely, but if necessary according to the quarantine judgment “It is actively asking for a list.”

Reporter Dayoung Kim [email protected]