'Service Development Act' Breaks Ground After 11 Years: Will Medical Service Act and Pharmaceutical Affairs Act Be Exempted?

"Law Applies to Entire Service Industry but Excessive Concerns"
Exclusion of Medical Service Act and Others Explicitly Separated

Medical Association Changes Stance: "Will Accept if Seobalbeop Excluded"
People Power Party: "It's a Matter of Whether It Applies to Specific Fields"

On February 19, Yoon Hoo-duk, the chairman of the Planning and Finance Committee, is striking the gavel at the plenary meeting held at the National Assembly.
[Image source=Yonhap News]

[Asia Economy Reporter Lee Hyun-joo] The Basic Act on Service Industry Development (Seobalbeop), which had been shelved for 11 years due to controversy over medical privatization, is now seeing active legislative discussions as it explicitly specifies the principle of prioritizing individual laws such as the Medical Service Act.

According to the legislative information system on the 26th, there are currently three bills related to Seobalbeop. These include the bill proposed by Lee Won-wook of the Democratic Party of Korea, which suggests not applying Seobalbeop to matters regulated by four laws: the Medical Service Act, National Health Insurance Act, Pharmaceutical Affairs Act, and Health Promotion Act; the bill led by Ryu Seong-geol of the People Power Party, which explicitly mentions three laws: the Medical Service Act, Pharmaceutical Affairs Act, and National Health Insurance Act; and the bill by Chu Kyung-ho of the People Power Party, which proposes excluding Article 15 of the Medical Service Act (prohibition of refusal of medical treatment), Articles 5, 41, and 42 of the National Health Insurance Act, among others.

Commonly, Article 3 of the bills states that if there are provisions in other laws, those laws should be followed. However, the Medical Service Act is singled out separately because in the past, due to controversies over medical privatization, the bill was not even properly discussed. In the 21st National Assembly, to minimize social controversy, a clause was included to exclude laws related to the Medical Service Act from the application of the Basic Act. Ryu Seong-geol of the People Power Party said in a phone interview with Asia Economy, "Basically, this law targets the entire service industry, but since there are overly concerned parts, it might be better to exclude medical-related matters."

The Korea Medical Association, which had opposed the enactment of Seobalbeop itself, has also changed its stance. Song Myung-je, Director of External Cooperation at the Medical Association, said, "We have opposed the Service Industry Development Act for 10 years, but if this law is absolutely necessary for other service sectors excluding health care, we have concluded that we can no longer oppose it," adding, "However, if the four health care laws directly related to public health are passed so that they are not subject to Seobalbeop, we are willing to accept it." Director Song pointed out that if Seobalbeop passes without any buffer measures, problems could arise in the medical sector, which is one of the service fields, such as investment-open medical corporations (for-profit hospitals), telemedicine, legalization of business by non-professional qualifications, and issuance of medical institution bonds.

However, the People Power Party argued at a public hearing on the 25th that explicitly excluding specific sectors could rather cause more controversy, so some difficulties are expected during the bill review process. They claim there is no need to explicitly mention only the Medical Service Act.

At the public hearing the day before, Chu Kyung-ho said, "If we are to enact the Service Industry Development Act, worrying about whether certain sectors are allowed or not from the start is inappropriate," emphasizing, "If the health care sector must be excluded here, then all other service areas should also be reviewed."

Park Hyung-soo also said, "Even if the law is enacted and the Service Industry Development Committee and the Medical Advancement Committee allow it, for example, tattoos are considered medical acts by the courts, so if done by someone without a medical license, they are punished, so it cannot be done," adding, "If it does not comply with the regulations, even if this law passes, it will not infringe on individual laws."

Seobalbeop is likely to be discussed and passed in the bill review subcommittee as early as March. Since the Democratic Party's Regulatory Innovation Promotion Team has declared its intention to pass it, momentum is expected to increase compared to before, but discussions on the supplementary budget scheduled for next month may cause delays.

This content was produced with the assistance of AI translation services.