Student Wearing Swim Cap Marked with High School Name... Court Rules Disqualification Justified

"No Provision in Admissions Guidelines Prohibiting Affiliation Markings on 'Swim Caps'"
"Interpreting the Ban as Applying to 'Swim Caps' Is a Natural Interpretation"

The court has ruled that a university's decision to disqualify a student as a cheater for wearing a swim cap marked with the name of their high school during a physical education entrance exam is justified.

According to the legal community on May 19, the Seoul Administrative Court's 14th Administrative Division (presiding judge Lee Sangdeok) ruled against the plaintiff in March in a lawsuit filed by individual A seeking to overturn B University’s decision to disqualify them from the regular admissions process.

Photo to aid understanding of the above article. Pixabay

Individual A applied for the 2024 regular admissions for the Department of Physical Education at B University, under the sports talent selection for the water polo category, and wore a swim cap marked with the name of their high school during the practical exam. The admissions guidelines for B University’s regular process explicitly stated, "No markings of any kind are permitted on athletic wear (for water polo, swimsuits), including affiliation, name, etc."

After receiving a complaint regarding individual A, B University conducted a fact-finding process and a review by the university admissions management committee, after which it classified A as a cheater and disqualified them. A subsequently filed an administrative lawsuit challenging this decision.

Individual A argued, "The admissions guidelines only prohibit any markings on 'swimsuits,' and do not explicitly ban affiliation markings on 'swim caps,' so the decision is unlawful as it is based on insufficiently clear guidelines." However, the court rejected this argument, stating that it is a natural interpretation to consider that wearing a swim cap marked with affiliation is also prohibited.

The court stated, "Interpreting 'swim cap' as included within 'swimsuit' does not go beyond the ordinary meaning of the words," and added, "Given that the purpose of the regulation is to prevent cheating and ensure fairness in admissions by allowing candidates to be assessed independently of their identity, there is no reason to treat swimsuits and swim caps differently."

Individual A also claimed that two other candidates wore swim caps with marks but were not disqualified. However, the court found that in those cases, the markings did not indicate their affiliation, and thus were different.

Regarding A's claim that "the exam proctors did not issue any warnings during the practical exam," the court explained, "The fact that the proctors did not point out the issue and allowed the exam to proceed as normal cannot be interpreted as granting the plaintiff any trust that they would not be treated as a cheater."