[4] Compiled from: Red Star News
 
Case review
It was learned from Qianjiang Court that the court recently heard a case involving a health rights dispute caused by tattooing a minor. The tattoo shop tattooed the minor without verifying their identity, and the shop owner apologized and compensated the cost of tattoo removal and other expenses totaling 20,000 yuan in court.

 

In 2021, Xiaowen, a junior high school student under 15, was attracted by some tattoo patterns while surfing the internet, thinking tattoos looked cool, and thus developed the idea of getting one.

At the end of last year, Xiaowen went to a tattoo shop and provided the tattoo pattern to the shop owner, who performed the tattoo service without verifying Xiaowen's age, covering an area of about 1,000 square centimeters. Xiaowen paid 1,200 yuan for the tattoo, but a few days later, Xiaowen's mother discovered it.
 
After being educated by his mother, Xiaowen realized the harm of tattoos and was filled with regret. Subsequently, Xiaowen's mother visited the tattoo shop multiple times to negotiate compensation, but the shop only agreed to remove the tattoo for free.

After consulting a professional plastic surgery institution, Xiaowen's mother was told that the tattoo removal would take two years, be extremely painful, and still carry risks of incomplete removal and scarring. She then filed a lawsuit against the tattoo shop in Xiaowen's name, requesting the court to order the shop to refund the tattoo fee and compensate for removal costs and emotional distress damages, totaling over 40,000 yuan.
 
 
《[1] The People's Republic of ChinaCivil Code
Article 19
Minors aged eight or above are persons with limited capacity for civil conduct, and their civil legal acts shall be performed by their legal representatives or with the consent or ratification of their legal representatives, except that they may independently perform civil legal acts that are purely beneficial or appropriate to their age and intelligence.
 
 
[1] The author's perspective
[1] Although the law does not explicitly prohibit minors from getting tattoos, the act of tattooing is clearly detrimental to the healthy physical and mental development of minors and deviates from the fundamental principles established by law. Moreover, minors are not yet able to fully understand the adverse effects of tattoos on their physical and personal interests, so this does not constitute a "purely beneficial" act under the aforementioned legal provision and should be considered an invalid civil legal act.
 
[2] Therefore, the tattoo shop, without verifying whether Xiaowen was a minor, arbitrarily performed large-area tattooing based on commercial interests, demonstrating clear fault and should bear corresponding legal responsibility.