"Received Laser Treatment but Scar, Compensation Denied"…Increase in Beauty and Plastic Surgery Damages

Consumer Agency Analyzes 322 Requests for Relief from Beauty and Plastic Surgery Damages

Types of Consumer Damage Related to Beauty and Plastic Surgery Medical Services.

[Asia Economy Reporter Lim Chun-han] # Mr. A underwent laser treatment to improve facial skin but developed burn scars on his forehead. Additional procedures caused red rashes and blisters. After being diagnosed with rosacea and pigmentation at another hospital, he requested compensation for side effects but was refused.

On the 26th, the Korea Consumer Agency announced that an analysis of 322 damage relief applications related to cosmetic and plastic surgery medical services received between 2019 and 2020 showed that contract-related damages were the most common, accounting for 163 cases (50.6%). This was followed by side effects (38.5%) and insufficient effectiveness (7.2%).

Among the 163 contract-related damage cases, 59.5% involved refusal to refund prepaid costs according to consumer dispute resolution standards when requesting contract cancellation or termination, and 40.5% involved excessive deductions from surgery or procedure costs followed by offers to refund the remaining procedure fees.

Providers cited reasons for refusing prepaid cost refunds such as having the consumer sign an agreement stating no refunds or having explained the non-refund policy in advance. However, the Consumer Agency pointed out that "this excludes or restricts the exercise of the right to cancel guaranteed by civil law," and "the Consumer Dispute Mediation Committee deems such agreements invalid."

Among 147 surgeries and procedures related to side effects and insufficient effectiveness, the majority involved the facial area including the eyes. The types of damage were scars (21.0%), asymmetry and inflammation (each 14.3%), and pigmentation (9.5%), in that order.

The Consumer Agency monitored online advertisements of 190 medical institutions that received damage relief applications related to cosmetic and plastic surgery medical services during the investigation period and found that 71 (37.4%) engaged in unfair advertising suspected of violating Article 56 of the Medical Service Act. Advertisements that misled consumers about treatment experiences or effects accounted for the largest share at 34.8%. This was followed by advertisements using certificates or appreciation plaques (21.7%), exaggerations of objective facts (14.1%), and advertisements claiming qualifications or titles without legal basis (8.7%).

A representative example is describing a specific area as "specialized" without being designated as a "specialized hospital" by the Ministry of Health and Welfare. The Consumer Agency plans to report suspected Medical Service Act violations to the Ministry of Health and Welfare and request stronger supervision. Consumers were advised not to be impulsively swayed by phrases such as "treatment experience," "discount advertisement," or "additional discount for same-day payment." They were also urged to listen carefully to sufficient explanations about side effects and complications and to thoroughly check refund policy details when signing contracts.

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