의료서비스 이용후기 광고 전면금지 규제에 대한 비판적 검토

This study aims to analyze the legal issues surrounding the regulation of online patient reviews in medical advertising, which significantly influence consumers' choices in modern information society, and to seek rational improvement measures that align with constitutional values. With the development of the internet, patients have evolved into active 'medical consumers', leading to an increased societal demand for sharing and searching for treatment experiences. However, the current Medical Service Act imposes a blanket ban on advertisements using "treatment experiences," regardless of their authenticity or whether they are paid for, creating a normative gap with these societal changes. This paper first examines the constitutional legitimacy of medical advertising regulation by analyzing the socioeconomic characteristics of medical services, such as information asymmetry and their public nature. Based on this, it argues that Article 56(2)(2) of the current Medical Service Act, which comprehensively prohibits advertisements featuring treatment experiences, is highly likely to violate the constitutional principle of proportionality, particularly the principles of the least restrictive means and the balance of interests. Furthermore, a comparative analysis of legislative examples from major foreign countries, including the United States, the United Kingdom, and Australia, confirms that the global regulatory paradigm is shifting from “outright prohibition” to “enhancing transparency and accountability” to guarantee consumer choice. Based on this analysis, this study proposes a shift from the current rigid regulatory paradigm to a tiered and differential regulatory model. This model would, in principle, permit genuine patient reviews while mandating the disclosure of any economic interests for paid testimonials. It would also strictly regulate content that is clearly false, exaggerated, or deceptive on an ex-post basis.