The Blurred Line of Tobacco Regulations in South Korea

Aug.15.2022
The Blurred Line of Tobacco Regulations in South Korea
The legal definition of tobacco in South Korea does not cover e-cigarettes, which are becoming increasingly popular among smokers.

The definition of tobacco under South Korea's Tobacco Industry Act's Article 2 states that it is made in a state suitable for smoking, sucking, inhaling steam, chewing or smelling tobacco leaves as the entire or partial raw material. This rule is far from reality, as liquid electronic cigarettes that fall into a legal grey area are invading the market among smokers. It has been pointed out that the Tobacco Industry Act urgently needs to be revised, as these alternative products cannot be considered "similar to cigarettes" and require proper regulation.


Currently, the government only officially counts two types of cigarette sales: traditional cigarettes and heated electronic cigarettes. According to market data from the first half of the year released by the Ministry of Strategy and Finance on June 29th, only 1.52 billion packs of traditional cigarettes and 260 million packs of heated electronic cigarettes were sold. The explanation given was that the sales of closed-system vaporizer (CSV) and solid-state electronic cigarettes, which were discontinued last year, are no longer being calculated.


However, there are several e-cigarette products that have escaped the law due to loopholes. If you search on internet portals, you will find liquid e-cigarettes that use nicotine extracted from plant stems and roots, rather than tobacco or chemically synthesized nicotine. It is common to see smokers using these products on the streets. They fall into a category known as "tobacco-like" but are not included in the legal definition of tobacco.


However, I cannot confirm how much they have actually sold. Lee Seong-ki, Director of the Korean Center for Tobacco Control Research and Education, stated that "According to estimates, this cigarette-like product accounts for 30-40% of all electronic cigarette products in South Korea." Government market data only tracks cigarettes and heated tobacco products, and does not fully represent the current state of the tobacco industry in South Korea.


Disclaimer: 1. The content of this article is compiled from third-party information and is only intended for exchange and learning within the industry. 2. This article does not represent the views of 2FIRSTS and 2FIRSTS cannot confirm the truthfulness or accuracy of the content. The compilation of this article is only for industry exchange and research purposes. 3. Due to limitations in the compilation level, the compiled article may not fully reflect the original text. Please refer to the original text for accuracy. 4. Regarding any domestic, Hong Kong, Macau, Taiwan, or foreign expression and stance, 2FIRSTS fully aligns with the Chinese government. 5. The copyright of the compiled information belongs to the original media and author. If there is any infringement, please contact us for deletion.



Disclaimer

This article is provided solely for professional research, industry discussion, and informational purposes. Any references to brands, companies, products, technologies, or policies are made for factual reporting and analytical purposes only, and do not constitute endorsement, recommendation, promotion, or advertising by 2Firsts.

Nicotine-containing products, including but not limited to cigarettes, e-cigarettes, heated tobacco products, and nicotine pouches, carry significant health risks. Readers are responsible for complying with all applicable laws and regulations in their respective jurisdictions, including age restrictions and access limitations.

The information contained in this article should not be regarded as investment, legal, medical, regulatory, or commercial advice. While 2Firsts strives to ensure the accuracy and reliability of its content, it does not assume liability for any direct or indirect loss arising from errors, omissions, inaccuracies, or reliance on the information contained herein.

This article is not intended for individuals below the legal age for accessing tobacco or nicotine-related information in their jurisdiction.

 

Copyright Notice

This article is either original content produced by 2Firsts or content reproduced, translated, summarized, or adapted from third-party sources with attribution where applicable. The intellectual property rights of the original content remain with 2Firsts or the respective original rights holders.

No individual or organization may copy, reproduce, distribute, republish, modify, translate, or otherwise use this content without prior authorization. Any unauthorized use may result in legal action.

For copyright-related inquiries, corrections, or removal requests, please contact: info@2firsts.com.

 

AI-Assisted Translation and Editing Notice

Portions of this article may have been translated, edited, or reviewed with the assistance of artificial intelligence tools to improve efficiency and readability. Due to the limitations of AI-assisted translation and editing, discrepancies, omissions, or inaccuracies may exist when compared with the original source.

Where applicable, readers are advised to refer to the original source for the most complete and accurate information. If you identify any errors or believe that any content infringes upon your rights, please contact us at info@2firsts.com, and we will review and address the matter promptly.

FDA Revises Import Alert 98-07 Rules, Bringing May Enforcement Priorities Into Unauthorized ENDS Detentions
FDA Revises Import Alert 98-07 Rules, Bringing May Enforcement Priorities Into Unauthorized ENDS Detentions
The U.S. Food and Drug Administration has revised the rules under Import Alert 98-07 to incorporate its May 2026 enforcement-priority policy for certain electronic nicotine delivery systems marketed without premarket authorization. The alert continues to allow detention without physical examination, or DWPE, for ENDS lacking required marketing authorization, while directing field divisions to apply the May risk-based framework. When necessary, detention or refusal decisions must also undergo review by the FDA's Center for Tobacco Products. Products including PACHA and Vuse Pro have already emerged as industry examples of the May policy, although enforcement discretion does not constitute FDA marketing authorization.
News
Sep.28 by 2Firsts Perspectives
UK Reform Party Proposes Cap of 1,000 Vape Shops Under Plan to Tighten Retail Controls
UK Reform Party Proposes Cap of 1,000 Vape Shops Under Plan to Tighten Retail Controls
The UK Reform Party has proposed limiting the number of dedicated vape shops in the country to around 1,000 as part of a plan to tighten oversight of vape retail channels. The proposal was put forward by Reform UK deputy leader and MP Lee Anderson. The plan remains a political proposal and has not become UK government policy, with no detailed legislation, implementation timeline or allocation rules announced.
Aug.10
Australian Coalition Taskforce Calls for 80% Tobacco Tax Cut to Combat Illicit Market
Australian Coalition Taskforce Calls for 80% Tobacco Tax Cut to Combat Illicit Market
According to SGST on August 26, 2026, Australia’s Coalition Illegal Tobacco Taskforce released a report recommending an up to 80% cut in tobacco excise to reduce the appeal of the illicit tobacco market. The report claimed organised crime groups now control about 80% of Australia’s tobacco market and argued that high excise rates have widened the price gap between legal and illegal products. The recommendation remains a policy proposal and has not been adopted by the Australian government, which said its focus remains on enforcement, compliance and additional resources.
Aug.27
Philip Morris Romania Executive on Smoke-Free Strategy: How IQOS Spaces Are Moving Beyond Retail to Consumer Connection
Philip Morris Romania Executive on Smoke-Free Strategy: How IQOS Spaces Are Moving Beyond Retail to Consumer Connection
In an interview with Romanian marketing publication IQads, Marek Gębski, Director of Smoke-Free Products at Philip Morris Romania, said IQOS experience spaces are evolving from traditional retail locations into platforms for consumer engagement and brand connection. Through locations such as IQOS Boutique Victoriei, PMI aims to use design, culture and consumer experiences to strengthen communication with adult consumers about smoke-free products. The interview highlights how tobacco companies are expanding smoke-free strategies beyond products toward experiential marketing and consumer relationships.
Aug.11
FDA Authorizes Four More Nicotine Pouches as Review Pilot Expands Beyond Initial Decisions
FDA Authorizes Four More Nicotine Pouches as Review Pilot Expands Beyond Initial Decisions
The FDA has authorized four additional on! nicotine pouches, bringing the U.S. total to 30. The decision marks another outcome of the agency’s nicotine pouch review pilot, whose communication and review practices are now being applied more broadly across the category. It also extends Helix’s authorized portfolio from on! PLUS to the earlier on! line. Yet all FDA-authorized nicotine pouches still come from subsidiaries of PMI or Altria, underscoring how concentrated U.S. regulatory access remains.
Aug.05
JUUL Purchasers Ask Ninth Circuit to Preserve Antitrust Classes in Case Over Altria’s $12.8 Billion Investment
JUUL Purchasers Ask Ninth Circuit to Preserve Antitrust Classes in Case Over Altria’s $12.8 Billion Investment
Private antitrust litigation stemming from Altria's 2018 $12.8 billion investment for a 35% economic interest in JUUL is advancing before the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit. Direct purchasers, indirect purchasers and indirect resellers of JUUL products filed answering briefs this week seeking to preserve class certifications granted by a California federal court in February. Altria and JUUL argue that individual consumers and large distributors differ too much in purchasing terms to remain in a single direct-purchaser class, while a separate dispute concerns whether California antitrust law can apply to indirect purchasers across 27 jurisdictions. A September trial has been put on hold during the appeal.
Sep.23