Deployed police officers around Gwanghwamun concert area

Photo: Daily Hankook (daily.hankooki.com)

On March 21, 2026, large sections of central Seoul came under extensive security control ahead of the BTS comeback concert. Police installed security lines around Gwanghwamun and set up 31 metal detector gates, while special forces were placed on standby. The measures were introduced by Ministry of the Interior and Safety as a preemptive response to the anticipated massive crowds. In reality, however, according to organizations including Seoul real-time urban data system, the actual crowd size reached about 40,000 to 65,000 people, falling far short of the police’s maximum estimate of 260,000. As citizens experienced inconvenience caused by excessive traffic control, random inspections, and movement restrictions, questions arose as to whether such measures were justified.

A citizen being stopped for a random inspections

Photo: Chosun Ilbo (chosun.com)

The Burden Placed on Citizens and Local Businesses

Ahead of the concert, police requested the cancellation of assemblies in the Gwanghwamun area, drawing criticism for infringing upon citizens’ fundamental rights. Human rights organization Baram condemned the decision as “a clear violation of the right to assembly and protest.” The restrictions also affected local businesses. According to Seoul real-time urban data based on Shinhan Card transactions, sales in the Gwanghwamun area dropped by more than 40% compared to the previous week during the concert period, while the number of transactions also declined. Convenience stores that had stocked large amounts of inventory in anticipation of massive crowds reportedly resorted to discount sales after failing to sell them.

Traffic restrictions spread beyond the immediate area. From the day before the concert until dawn the following morning, 51 city bus routes were forced to take a detour, bypassing stops entirely, while numerous intercity bus routes were also changed. Citizens reported inconvenience over blocked roads and random inspections. Kim Byeol-ha, a student in the Dept. of Police and Security at Yeonsung University, stated that she experienced severe traffic congestion that day. “Even residents living in the Gyeonggi area were affected,” she said. “I ended up canceling all my plans in Seoul because I was worried about getting home.” 

Miscalculated Estimates Behind the Excessive Response

Critics argue that the disruption stemmed from inaccurate crowd projections. Authorities, however, maintained that the measures were unavoidable for safety. The ministry stated, “A large influx of domestic and international visitors was expected, and the possibility of terrorism amid instability in the Middle East Asia also had to be considered.” The ministry described the measures as a necessary preemptive response aimed at preventing accidents before they occurred. Police likewise explained that the projection of up to 260,000 people had been a conservative estimate, arguing that over-preparation was preferable to insufficient response that could result in accidents.

Still, the ministry’s crowd management system ultimately estimated the actual audience at only around 40,000 people on the day of the concert, far below the original projection. As a result, the estimate became the basis for what critics viewed as an excessive deployment of administrative resources.

More than 15,000 public personnel were mobilized in the Gwanghwamun area on the day of the concert, includin ambulances from regions outside Seoul. The Seoul chapter of the Korean Government Employees’ Union criticized the decision, stating that deploying large numbers of public per-sonnel to a privately organized concert could weaken the government’s ability to respond to actual public emergencies.

Traffic control                              

Photo: The Segye Times (segye.com)

Public Costs and Private Profits

The issue of taxpayer spending also emerged as a majo controversy. A significant amount of taxpayer money was spent on the event, including allowances for public personnel, traffic control costs, and other administrative expenses. Critics pointed out that the concert was organized by HYBE, a private entertainment corporation.

Kang Min-seong, a professor in the Dept. of Public Administration at Kyung Hee University, said, “The government’s cautious response was understandable after the Itaewon crowd crush.” However, he questioned whether deploying 15,000 public personnel was truly necessary. He acknowledged BTS’s cultural influence but argued that the current structure still appeared unbalanced because public costs were covered by taxpayers while profits ultimately went to a private corporation.

Kang pointed out that while HYBE paid less than 100 million won for the use of Gwanghwamun Square, the concert still required large-scale public expenses. He stated that many citizens could reasonably see the arrangement as unfair and that mechanisms for public cost-sharing or social contribution should exist when profits and promotional benefits accrue to private companies.

Finally, Kang emphasized that the core issue was not BTS itself, but rather with the broader question of how public resources should be allocated and supported.

The response drew criticism on multiple levels, ranging from taxpayer spending to restrictions on citizens’ mobility, damage to nearby businesses, and limitations on the freedom of assembly.

The controversy surrounding the concert ultimately extended beyond a single performance. It raised broader questions about the balance between public safety, civil inconvenience, and the use of taxpayer-funded resources. At the same time, it highlighted the need for clearer standards and greater transparency regarding public support for large-scale cultural events.