South Korea court limits blanket denial of treatment costs after vaccine injury payouts

The Supreme Court has ruled that receiving a disability lump sum does not automatically prevent claimants from seeking reimbursement for earlier or worsening-illness treatment.

South Korea’s Supreme Court has ruled that people who receive a temporary disability payment for vaccine-related injury cannot automatically be blocked from claiming further medical costs, a decision that narrows how the compensation rules may be applied in future cases. According to Aju News and other Korean outlets reporting the ruling, the court said expenses incurred before the disability payment was made, as well as later treatment costs linked to a relapse or worsening of the illness, should not be excluded simply because a claimant already received a lump-sum award.

The case concerned a man who developed Guillain-Barré syndrome after an influenza vaccination in 2014 and was later assessed as having a severe disability. He initially sought compensation, was turned down, and later won in the Supreme Court in 2021. The health authorities then paid disability compensation and medical and caregiving expenses covering treatment up to July 2015, but they did not recognise the additional costs that arose while the litigation continued.

When the claimant asked for another round of reimbursement in 2021, the Korea Disease Control and Prevention Agency refused, relying on a provision in the enforcement decree of the Infectious Disease Control and Prevention Act. Lower courts then sided with the claimant, finding that the decree had gone beyond the scope of the parent law by creating a new ground for denying payment. The Supreme Court did not go that far, but it still upheld the result.

In its reasoning, the court said the rule should be read more narrowly: it can bar duplication only for so-called conservative treatment costs after a disability payment has already been made, because those expenses are treated as having been folded into the lump sum. It cannot, however, be used to deny treatment costs that arose before the compensation was paid, or active treatment needed after the illness recurred or became worse. Because the authorities had rejected the claim in blanket form, the court said the entire refusal had to be cancelled rather than partially trimmed. The claimant died in June 2024 before the appeal was heard, and the case was carried forward by his heirs, who ultimately prevailed. Reporting from Korea also noted that the decision does not order the full additional sum to be paid immediately; instead, it confirms that the blanket denial was unlawful.