However, an unrevised criminal statute creates ambiguity regarding whether hospital-affiliated pharmacists can legally dispense these medications, leaving unresolved legal risks and pending health insurance coverage decisions.
Legal uncertainty for pharmacists and phased medication rollout
- The Legal Blind Spot: While South Korea’s Constitutional Court struck down provisions penalizing women and prescribing doctors, statutes penalizing pharmacists assisting in termination procedures remain active, creating operational uncertainty for hospital-employed pharmacists.
For the first two years following introduction, the protocol restricts distribution exclusively to hospital environments, requiring physicians to both prescribe and dispense the medications directly to patients.
This phased rollout serves a dual purpose. Operationally, however, the restriction also addresses a critical legal contradiction regarding pharmacy-level dispensing.
Constitutional Court Rulings and the Pharmacist Penalization Loophole
The regulatory ambiguity stems from legislative inaction following a landmark 2019 Constitutional Court ruling. At that time, the court determined that the criminal code provisions punishing women who undergo voluntary terminations and physicians who perform them were non-conforming with the constitution. Because the National Assembly failed to pass corrective legislation by the December 2020 deadline, those specific clauses lost legal force.
However, the original statutory provisions penalizing other practitioners—specifically pharmacists and traditional Korean medicine doctors—were omitted from the constitutional review and remain active on the books seven years later. Legal experts, including Lee Eun-hee of the Eunhee Law Office, note that while routine investigative sweeps or targeted entrapment prosecutions are unlikely, the underlying statutes cannot be dismissed as legally dead.
To bridge this gap during the initial two-year window, Ministry for Gender Equality and Family officials stated that specific operational guidelines will be incorporated into upcoming Ministry of Health and Welfare clinical practice instructions. If the National Assembly fails to revise the criminal code and the Mother and Child Health Act within the initial two-year implementation window, the requirement for in-hospital dispensing may be officially extended.
| Parameter | Initial Phase (Years 1-2) | Outstanding Legislative & Administrative Hurdles |
|---|---|---|
| Dispensing Location | Hospital interior only (Physician prescription and dispensing) | Hospital-employed pharmacist legal liability remains unaddressed by revised criminal statutes. |
| Statutory Status | Constitutional Court rulings invalidated doctor and patient penalties in 2020. | Pharmacist and herbalist penalization clauses remain active under the Criminal Act. |
| Health Insurance | Currently undetermined (Pending manufacturer application) | Potential cost disparities across institutions if categorized strictly as non-reimbursable care. |
Health Insurance Coverage and Economic Accessibility Concerns
During a radio broadcast on September 22, 2026, Minister Won Min-kyung expressed support for active public health insurance integration to ensure broad accessibility.
The Ministry of Health and Welfare maintains that formal bureaucratic mechanisms must be initiated by pharmaceutical manufacturers before reimbursement reviews can commence. During the policy briefing on September 16, 2026, health ministry representatives clarified that the state cannot independently designate the drug for insurance benefits until the respective pharmaceutical company formally submits an application for review.
Constitutional Court and government regulatory references
- Constitutional Court of South Korea. Decision on the Constitutionality of the Abortion Statutes. Case 2017Hun-Ba127.
- Ministry for Gender Equality and Family. September 2026.
- Ministry of Health and Welfare. Regulatory Review Guidelines for Pharmaceutical Benefit Applications. Government Press Release, September 2026.
