In Korea, the movement disclosure system (disclosure of the movement path of confirmed patients with infectious diseases) has been the core of quarantine measures from the beginning of the pandemic. The system is based on the Infected Disease Control and Prevention Act, Article 34-2. According to the act, the head of the Korea Centers for Disease Control and Prevention, the mayor, and the district heads are required to disclose information such as the route and means of transportation of infectious disease patients to the public. A criticism has been raised that the movement disclosure system violates the individual right to privacy and personal dignity. This study introduces constitutional issues surrounding the substantive and procedural legitimacy of the movement disclosure system and shows the results of a survey on the perception of ordinary citizens on these issues. On average, 1,000 respondents approve the legitimacy of the movement disclosure system. Respondents' average evaluation is that the movement disclosure system has not only substantive constitutional legitimacy but also procedural democratic legitimacy. This tendency is the same regardless of the respondents' gender, age, and political orientation. Additionally, respondents generally show that if the movement disclosure policy has secured procedural democracy, it can be accepted in the emergent situation of the pandemic, even if it limits basic rights. From the survey, it might be inferred that communication and cooperation with civil society are essential in preparing policies even in emergencies, and that policies prepared through such democratic governance are highly acceptable.