On January 15, 2026, Seoul’s Jongno-gu district found itself at the center of two dramatic and very different legal battles—one playing out in the city’s courtrooms over the rights of disabled citizens at bus stops, and another erupting in a residential apartment, ultimately involving the police and a sprawling investigation. Both events, though distinct in their particulars, have put a spotlight on the challenges of accessibility, public safety, and the ongoing quest for justice in South Korea’s capital.
Let’s begin at the Seoul Central District Court, where a pivotal lawsuit regarding the rights of disabled individuals to accessible public transportation reached its first verdict. According to Hankyoreh, a coalition of disability rights groups—including the Disability Discrimination Act Promotion Solidarity and the National Disabled People’s Mobility Rights Solidarity—filed suit against eight local government heads, demanding that they comply with legal standards for installing accessibility facilities at bus stops.
The plaintiffs, a group of physically and visually impaired citizens, argued that their daily lives had been severely restricted by the lack of essential accommodations at bus stops. Their complaints ranged from the absence of Braille blocks and tactile route maps for the visually impaired to uneven, narrow access paths that made it nearly impossible for those in wheelchairs to approach or maneuver within bus stop areas. The case, at its heart, was about more than just physical infrastructure—it was about the right to move through the city with dignity and independence.
South Korean law is clear: under the Disability Discrimination Act and the Enforcement Decree of the Act on Promotion of the Transportation Convenience of Mobility Disadvantaged Persons, transportation authorities must not restrict, exclude, separate, or refuse access to disabled individuals. Facilities such as Braille blocks, guidance systems, and sufficient space for wheelchair movement are not optional—they’re required. Yet, as the plaintiffs detailed, these standards were often ignored.
"There were many stops where the width was so narrow that a wheelchair couldn’t even enter, and some didn’t even have the proper level difference for a lift to be lowered," recalled Kim Dong-rim, director of the Gimpo Disabled Independence Living Center, speaking at a press conference following the verdict. He remembered personally surveying bus stops near his home five years ago, finding them woefully inadequate. "The level of mobility rights should not depend on the financial independence or will of each local government. Beyond simple recommendations, there must be a strong mechanism to hold authorities legally accountable when standards are not met."
The court’s verdict was a partial win for the plaintiffs. The Seoul Central District Court, presided over by Judge Choi Jong-jin, ruled that Seoul Metropolitan Government, Seoul’s Jongno District, Gwangju Metropolitan City, and Gwangju’s Buk-gu District must upgrade their bus stops to comply with all relevant accessibility standards. However, the court did not find the other four local governments responsible, dismissing the claims against them. This split decision drew criticism from both advocates and legal representatives.
Kim Jin-young, an attorney from the Dongcheon Foundation representing the plaintiffs, voiced frustration at the court’s inconsistency: "There are several visually impaired plaintiffs, but the court recognized only some of their claims while entirely dismissing others. This is a contradictory stance." She continued, "A life without mobility is no life at all. The plaintiffs have been restricted in every aspect of daily life—work, banking, medical visits. When society operates by excluding the disabled, the only recourse for the vulnerable is the court’s fair judgment. Yet, even here, the court did not fully stand with the plaintiffs. While some claims were upheld, it’s hard to accept the dismissals." Kim confirmed that they would closely review the dismissed portions and consider an appeal.
The court’s decision has already sparked broader calls for reform. Disability rights activists at the courthouse rally demanded that all local governments ensure public transportation facilities serve everyone, not just the able-bodied. Choi Young-eun, an activist at the Nodeul Disabled Independence Living Center, described the day-to-day struggles: "If people are sitting at the bus stop, the space is so tight that I can’t even pass by in my power wheelchair, let alone wait inside. When a low-floor bus arrives, the driver has to maneuver several times to find a spot where I can board because of curbs and other obstacles. It’s a burden not just for me, but for the driver and other passengers as well."
Meanwhile, elsewhere in Jongno-gu, a very different kind of crisis was unfolding. According to Kyunghyang Shinmun, a violent altercation broke out in a one-room apartment, drawing in as many as 400 people over the course of four tense hours. The spark? A dispute between resident A and another individual, B (aged 54), which quickly escalated. In the presence of around 40 people, A assaulted B, inflicting injuries that required hospital treatment. The chaos, which began in the early afternoon, only subsided after police intervened and began a thorough investigation.
The Seoul Jongno Police Station is now reviewing CCTV footage and gathering testimonies to piece together exactly what happened. Officers have pledged a comprehensive investigation and promised to "take appropriate legal actions" against those found responsible. The sheer scale of the incident—and the fact that it occurred in a densely populated residential area—has left many residents shaken. It’s not every day that a fight involving hundreds of people erupts in the heart of the city, and the authorities are under pressure to explain both the causes and the consequences.
These two stories, though unrelated in their specifics, each reveal something fundamental about the current state of life in Seoul. On one hand, the fight for accessibility and equal rights continues to be an uphill battle, with legal victories that are partial at best. On the other, the challenges of maintaining public order and safety in the city’s crowded neighborhoods remain ever-present. Both highlight the importance of robust institutions—whether courts or police—in protecting the vulnerable and upholding the rule of law.
As the legal teams prepare for a likely appeal in the bus stop accessibility case, and police continue their investigation into the Jongno-gu apartment brawl, Seoul’s residents are left to ponder what these events say about the city’s progress—and its persistent shortcomings. The hope, for many, is that these high-profile incidents will serve as catalysts for real, lasting change.
