유사 니코틴 성분의 담배제품 관리를 위한 국가별 규제 체계 비교연구

초록

-Objective:Synthetic nicotine analogues such as 6-methylnicotine are increasingly incorporated into novel tobacco products marketed in South Korea. However, the current regulatory framework lacks explicit provisions to regulate these emerging products. The study aimed to investigate international regulatory approaches to nicotine analogues and analyze specific marketed products to identify how these substances are being regulated, as well as existing limitations. -Methods:The study examined the regulatory frameworks of South Korea, the United States, the European Union, Australia, and Canada to evaluate the extent to which existing legislation provides a foundation for regulating nicotine analogue products. The analysis focused on the statutory definitions of tobacco products, electronic cigarettes, and nicotine, as well as the degree to which current provisions enable regulatory enforcement. In addition, marketed products were analyzed by identifying domestic and international examples through direct purchase, official websites, and published literature. Labeling information was also analyzed to determine how these products are classified across jurisdictions and to assess the applicability of existing regulatory measures. -Results:South Korea currently lacks a legal basis for regulating tobacco products containing nicotine analogues. Similarly, U.S. federal law does not cover these products; however, several states have amended their laws to address them. In contrast, the EU, Canada, and Australia have extended or revised their existing regulatory frameworks to cover nicotine analogues, primarily by classifying them as tobacco or e-cigarette products. Australia has further imposed bans on the manufacture and sale of these products. -Conclusion:To address the rapid proliferation of emerging tobacco products, South Korea should adopt a forward-looking regulatory approach that builds upon existing legal frameworks and strengthens their application. Rather than responding reactively to tobacco industry circumvention, regulatory authorities need to establish a preventive tobacco control paradigm through coordinated inter-ministerial action. Such an approach is essential to closing regulatory gaps and ensuring robust protection of public health.

키워드