The Korean Medicine Association (KMA) has escalated its opposition to the so-called "8-week rule" for auto insurance, demanding the Ministry of Land, Infrastructure and Transport (MOLIT) halt its legislative review of the controversial measure even as non-life insurers grow anxious over repeated delays.
The KMA issued a statement on May 31 declaring "strong protest against MOLIT for proceeding with a surprise review by the Ministry of Government Legislation to introduce the 8-week limit system for minor-injury auto insurance patients, ignoring social consensus and promises made during the parliamentary audit."
MOLIT has been pushing to amend the enforcement rules of the Automobile Damage Compensation Guarantee Act to curb auto insurance payouts. Under the proposed amendment, traffic accident victims classified under injury grades 12 to 14 would need to prove the medical necessity of treatment through a review by a designated body before receiving care beyond eight weeks. Injury grades 12 to 14 refer to relatively minor injuries such as bruises, sprains (neck, back, wrist, etc.), and abrasions.
The system was originally set to take effect on January 1 this year but has been postponed three times. MOLIT maintains the system will be implemented soon, but at this point no timeline can be assured.
"The repeated delays themselves prove that sufficient verification and consensus on the system have not been achieved," the KMA said. "The KMA has faithfully attended consultative body and working-level meetings to develop reasonable improvements, but MOLIT effectively nullified the consultation process by pushing ahead with the legislative review before the consultative body reached an official conclusion." The association argued this amounts to a clear deception of the public and the medical community and is tantamount to ignoring the National Assembly's policy oversight and social deliberation procedures.
The KMA warned that restricting treatment for minor-injury patients by the uniform standard of eight weeks and entrusting decisions on medical necessity to an external body rather than medical professionals would seriously infringe on patients' right to treatment. Even if the review were transferred from insurers' self-review to a "public body," the fundamental problem of restricting patients' treatment rights while only enriching insurers remains completely unresolved, the association added. The KMA called for a complete redesign through sufficient consultation with the medical community in a manner that respects medical judgment, with protection of patients' right to treatment as the top priority.
"We demand MOLIT immediately halt the surprise legislative review and re-examine the system from scratch as promised during the parliamentary audit," the KMA said. "We will firmly respond to any attempt to infringe on patients' right to treatment."