Although the revised enforcement rules of the Food Sanitation Act allowing entry to restaurants with companion animals took effect on the 1st, more eateries in the dining industry are declaring "No-Pet Zones." Because of stringent hygiene and facility standards and the risk of administrative penalties, some small businesses that had previously allowed companion animals are giving up operations.
According to the Ministery of Food and Drug Safety on the 5th, under the revised enforcement rules of the Food Sanitation Act that took effect on the 1st, general restaurants, snack bars, and bakeries can allow entry with dogs and cats if certain standards are met. The Ministery of Food and Drug Safety said that after running a regulatory sandbox, it found positive effects at restaurants allowing companion animals, such as improved hygiene and safety levels and higher satisfaction among the industry and consumers, and decided to end the pilot program and expand the number of establishments that can allow entry with companion animals.
Establishments that allow entry with companion animals must post a notice at the entrance and check vaccination status. Movement must also be restricted with leashes, cages, or dedicated seats. In addition, to block companion animals from entering areas where food is handled, partitions or fences must be installed, and covers must be used on food to prevent foreign matter from getting in. If these rules are violated, administrative penalties can include a 15-day business suspension for a first violation and revocation of a business license for a third violation.
A café owner in Gyeonggi Province said, "When the law was announced, I considered operating as a pet-friendly store, but there was too much to change, and I gave up because of the burden of customer complaints and administrative penalties."
The purpose of introducing the system was to establish standards to bring the culture of dining with companion animals into the institutional framework, as there had been no hygiene and safety standards for such restaurants. On the ground, complaints are emerging that the burden of facility investment and management is excessively heavy. In particular, from the owners' perspective, additional expense arises for securing table spacing, separating traffic flow, and providing dedicated facilities, and small shops face a greater burden because they can receive business suspension if there is an inspection or a complaint.
Some cafés and restaurants that had operated with companion animals are stopping such operations and switching to No-Pet Zones in response to the stringent system after the law took effect. Confusion is continuing even among owners who had previously allowed companion animals. Limiting the scope of companion animals in the law to only dogs and cats is also causing confusion on the ground. There are no guidelines for special animals such as ferrets (European polecats), which are not dogs or cats.
In the self-employed community "Because It Hurts, I'm the Boss," posts read, "I currently run a dog café, and the implemented law is complicated," "I've been running a store that allowed dogs, but it actually got harder with the law taking effect. Unless we properly set up dog-friendly seating, it's hard to operate rashly," and "I plan to switch to no entry starting tomorrow."
The industry sees a high likelihood that this system will become a policy centered on large stores and franchises. Large stores with spacious areas and the capacity to invest in facilities can meet the standards, but small restaurants have no choice but to give up allowing companion animals. From the perspective of large franchises as well, it is difficult to introduce pet-friendly operations hastily until the system expands across society.
An official in the dining industry said, "If the system is established and a social atmosphere where dining with dogs is natural forms, the industry will consider adopting it. For now, even for dining franchises, each franchise location has different circumstances, and we must consider existing customers' situations such as fur allergies, so we are aware of the content but are not introducing it." Another official said, "For small stores, the expense burden is heavy, and for franchises or large stores, there still seems to be no reason to take on the immediate burden and operate as a dog-friendly store."
A Ministery of Food and Drug Safety official said, "In principle, restaurants were banned from allowing companion animals, except for a small number of stores that previously participated in the regulatory sandbox," adding, "We are implementing this to ease the rules within the institutional framework. From the perspective of food safety, we gathered various opinions and set up the system, and we will listen to more diverse opinions."