Home > Opinion > Editorials

The ‘Doctor Now Prevention Act’ should not suffocate telemedicine

Published: 02 Dec. 2025, 00:00

Jung Jin-woong, CEO of Doctor Now (left), speaks during a press briefing hosted by the Korea Telemedicine Industry Council at the Korea Press Center in central Seoul on Nov. 10. The event focused on presenting survey results on public demand for telemedicine policies and industry recommendations. [YONHAP]

A bill to revise the Pharmaceutical Affairs Act and ban telemedicine platforms from operating drug-wholesale businesses is scheduled for a vote in the National Assembly on Tuesday. The proposal, introduced last November by Democratic Party (DP) lawmaker Kim Yoon, has been nicknamed the “Doctor Now Prevention Act” because Doctor Now is the only telemedicine platform that runs a wholesale operation.

Startups fear the bill could become another version of the “Tada ban,” which halted a fast-growing mobility service in 2020. In March last year, Doctor Now created its own drug wholesaler to reduce the inconvenience faced by patients who had to visit multiple pharmacies to obtain prescriptions issued through telemedicine. Using the wholesaler’s stock data and dispensing records, the platform matched pharmacy inventory in real time and delivered medicines more efficiently to patients.

The government, the ruling party and the Korean Pharmaceutical Association support the bill, citing concerns that pharmacies could become dependent on the platforms and that inducement, steering or rebates could emerge. Health Minister Jeong Eun-kyeong told the Legislation and Judiciary Committee on Nov. 26 that the bill “does not ban telemedicine platforms,” but addresses risks that arise when a platform also serves as a wholesaler. Because hospitals and pharmacies are already barred from operating wholesalers, she said, regulating platforms with far greater influence is reasonable. Pharmaceutical distribution affects public health and is tied to the national insurance system, giving it a strong public-interest character. Oversight to ensure fairness, transparency and safeguards against overuse is therefore appropriate.

Still, new technology requires a balance between regulation and innovation. Supporters call the revision “a good regulation to protect local pharmacies,” as DP lawmaker Seo Young-kyo put it. But the startup sector’s concern that the bill could “shackle innovation” should not be dismissed. Although the government argues that this bill is not another Tada ban, it effectively outlaws a wholesale business that Doctor Now has legally operated for more than a year with government approval. The consumer inconvenience the platform aimed to solve — the “pharmacy circuit” — has been overlooked, and regulatory predictability weakened.

The revision to the Medical Service Act, which legalized telemedicine, was a step forward. Yet the law still favors in-person care at local clinics, limits telemedicine largely to follow-up consultations and restricts initial visits to providers within a patient’s residential area. If the Pharmaceutical Affairs Act revision passes as well, the ecosystem supporting telemedicine may struggle to grow. The Korea Venture Business Association has warned that if pharmacy-linked platforms such as Amazon One Medical enter the Korean market, domestic firms will be constrained from competing in areas that are already permitted abroad.

Korea should avoid repeating past failures in regulating innovation. A law meant to address specific concerns must not extinguish an entire emerging industry.

This article was originally written in Korean and translated by a bilingual reporter with the help of generative AI tools. It was then edited by a native English-speaking editor. All AI-assisted translations are reviewed and refined by our newsroom.