Park Jun-hyeong, 35, head of Graycity, said this at his office in Songpa District, Seoul, on the 1st. It was right after the Supreme Court on the 21st of last month changed, for the first time in 34 years, its precedent of punishing non-medical personnel for tattooing under the Medical Service Act. The Supreme Court overturned and remanded Park's case with a ruling of not guilty, saying, "Tattooing is no longer the exclusive property of certain groups but has become a culture that ordinary people naturally encounter."
Park picked up hairdressing scissors at 20. At 26, during training in the United States, he came across scalp micropigmentation (SMP; Scalp Micro-Pigmentation). It is a technique that creates tiny dots on the scalp so a bald person looks like they have a closely shaved head. It was unfamiliar in Korea at the time, but he thought "there is a bigger opportunity beneath the hair." To master techniques suited to Korean head shapes and scalps, he performed the procedure on his own head and, at 28, started a company specializing in scalp micropigmentation.
The business grew quickly, but complaints soon followed. There was one issue. Can a non-medical person do tattoos? In 1992, the Supreme Court deemed tattooing a medical act, and Park also received fines in the first and second trials. He could have paid the fines and ended the case, but he chose a full trial. He appealed to the Supreme Court that "the world has changed."
When asked about his feelings at the time of the ruling, Park paused.
But the legal battle is not entirely over. The Supreme Court overturned the precedent of punishing non-medical tattooing under the Medical Service Act, but the Tattooist Act, which sets tattooist licensing and shop registration, takes effect in October next year. A separate case against Park for violating the Act on the Aggravated Punishment, etc. of Specific Economic Crimes is still pending before the Supreme Court.
Park said, "From now on, I will do my utmost on the ground so that Korea's tattoo industry attains world-class levels of safety, education, hygiene and professionalism."
This interview also included Deputy Managing Attorney Hwang Jin-seop of law firm Daeryun and Managing Attorney Ha Chae-eun of Maeil Law Office, who helped change the Medical Service Act precedent on tattoos. The following is a Q&A.
─What led you to decide to make scalp micropigmentation your profession?
Park: "In the United States and Europe, there were already many cases of bald people getting scalp micropigmentation. In Asia, including Korea, the technique was not yet well known. While working as a hairdresser I learned about scalp micropigmentation, and the more I looked into it, the more I thought it was a pretty good item. I started in 2017, and until then there were almost no shops in Korea specializing in scalp micropigmentation."
─Many tattooists operate without registering as businesses because of the risk of criminal punishment. Why did you even establish a corporation in 2020 and expand the business?
Park: "Most tattooists try to operate quietly. I, too, initially did scalp micropigmentation while working in beauty services. But I didn't think there was any reason not to be aboveboard. I believed that if we strictly managed hygiene and safety and paid taxes, tattooing would someday be legalized and recognized. Including directly managed branches and partner locations, we have performed over 10,000 procedures so far, and there has not been a single hygiene issue."
Even before, it was possible for tattooists to register as businesses. However, in a situation where tattooing could be punished as a violation of the Medical Service Act, business registration was effectively the same as notifying the government that one was "operating illegally." In the past, some cosmetic tattooists were arrested and indicted, or the National Tax Service clawed back taxes by taking issue with tattooing revenue.
─It seems you must have suffered a lot mentally during the legal battles.
Park: "When they came after me under the Act on the Aggravated Punishment, etc. of Specific Economic Crimes, I thought, 'At this rate I could even go to prison.' We pulled ads. Sales plunged. It was so hard I wondered if I should quit. Staff morale fell because they were exposed to the risk of punishment. Marketing was also difficult. What's best about this ruling is that employees can now work with their heads held high."
─I heard that although the charge was a violation of the Medical Service Act, it wasn't only doctors who reported tattooists.
Park: "Since I started scalp micropigmentation, there have been three indictments. One case seems to have been reported by doctors who perform hair-loss-related procedures. An association of tattooists also filed complaints. That group had financial conflicts with large tattoo companies, and Graycity was one of them."
Prosecutors initially summarily indicted this case with a fine. If Park had paid the fine, the case could have ended. But he requested a formal trial. He thought that if he accepted guilt, the industry practice of filing complaints to check competitors would continue. In the first and second trials in 2021, a fine of 1.5 million won was imposed. Park said, "I didn't want to acknowledge that I had committed a crime the moment I paid the fine."
─You were found guilty in line with existing precedent in the first and second trials. What strategy did you craft to win at the Supreme Court?
Attorney Hwang: "From the start, we didn't necessarily think the Supreme Court was highly likely to change precedent. Still, we believed there was justification. Our first goal was to have the case referred to the full bench."
Attorney Ha: "We thought it would be difficult to overturn a precedent that had stood for 34 years by arguing only legal doctrine. So we thought we needed to change the frame. We had to show that 'the standards of 1992 no longer fit the reality of 2026' and that 'society has already changed.' We presented to the Supreme Court that standards had changed so that even with tattoos one can enlist as an active-duty soldier, and that one can be appointed as a police officer despite having tattoos."
Overturning and remanding Park's case with a ruling of not guilty, the Supreme Court noted the shift in social perception of tattoos. The thrust was that tattoos are no longer a symbol of certain groups but have entered the realm of popular culture and beauty.
─What do you think about the regulations to be introduced under the Tattooist Act?
Park: "I think licensing is only natural. It can raise trust in the profession and further grow the market. But if the qualification system is detached from tattooists' practical work, it could be ineffective."
Attorney Ha: "I hear there's a proposal that tattoo facilities be built to the level of a hospital clean room. Even the spaces where injections are given in hospitals aren't clean rooms, so the industry is worried the standards may become excessively high."
The National Assembly enacted the Tattooist Act in September last year to legalize tattooing by non-medical personnel. From October next year, those who pass a national qualification exam and obtain a license can legally perform tattoo procedures. Tattoo shops must meet certain requirements for facilities and equipment and register their establishment with cities, counties or districts. In contrast, only some U.S. states operate tattooist licensing systems, and France has a notification system for tattoo shops.
─You have been performing scalp micropigmentation for 10 years. What do you think tattoos are?
Park: "It's not just a simple cosmetic act. I have seen many people who lost confidence due to hair loss, those who found it hard to meet people for a long time because of scars, and those who suffered from appearance complexes gain confidence and change their attitude toward life after procedures. Tattoos can change a person's life."