Limitations regarding the use of quotes
The quotes provided here reflect statements from a specific decision. Accordingly, the International Legal Consortium (ILC) cannot guarantee that an appellate court has not reversed a lower court decision which may influence the applicability or influence of a given quote. All quotes have been selected based on the subjective evaluations undertaken by the ILC meaning that quotes provided here may not accurately or comprehensively represent a given court’s opinion or conclusion, as such quotes may have originally appeared alongside other negative opinions or accompanying facts. Further, some quotes are derived from unofficial English translations, which may alter their original meaning. We emphasize the need to review the original decision and related decisions before authoritatively relying on quotes. Using quotes provided here should not be construed as legal advice and is not intended to be a substitute for legal counsel on any subject matter in any jurisdiction. Please see the full limitations at https://www.tobaccocontrollaws.org/about.
The National Health Insurance Service (NHIS), which is responsible for managing the national health insurance, filed a healthcare cost recovery action against the leading tobacco companies in Korea to seek reimbursement of the healthcare costs for 3,465 individuals who were long-term smokers of the tobacco defendants’ cigarettes and who were diagnosed with certain types of cancers. NHIS sought to recover ₩53 billion, (approximately $US 50 million in 2014) in healthcare insurance costs on the basis that the tobacco companies’ unlawful conduct such as designing a defective product and misleading consumers about the health risks of cigarettes, among other torts, caused financial damage to NHIS.
The Seoul Central District Court denied NHIS’ complaint in its entirety, which the agency appealed. On appeal, the Seoul High Court affirmed the lower court’s ruling and dismissed NHIS’ claim in its entirety, finding that NHIS’ expenditures arose from its obligations as an insurer under the National Health Insurance Act, rather than from the tobacco companies alleged unlawful conduct. The Court found that the evidence was insufficient to establish the liability of the tobacco companies under applicable product liability, consumer protection, and general tort law. Further, the Court held that epidemiological evidence alone was insufficient to establish causation and that individual proof of causation was required to satisfy the applicable legal standard.