A ruling by the Supreme Court stated that cannabidiol (CBD), an ingredient extracted from hemp stems, is also classified as hemp, therefore justifying the import ban measure. The Supreme Court confirmed that CBD, used as an ingredient in cosmetics, food, and beverages, also falls under the regulated category of hemp.
The Supreme Court's 3rd Division (Chief Justice Lee Suk-yeon) ruled in favor of company A, a domestic cosmetic ingredient importer, against the Korea Pharmaceutical Export-Import Association in a lawsuit challenging the cancellation of the issuance of the standard customs advance report, stating that "the import ban measure is justified." Following this decision to overturn, the case has returned to the Seoul High Court.
Company A applied to the Korea Pharmaceutical Export-Import Association for a standard customs advance report to use CBD as a cosmetic ingredient. The association must issue a standard customs clearance report in order for the import to proceed. However, the association determined that CBD is classified as hemp and rejected the issuance of the report. Consequently, company A filed a lawsuit to cancel the denial of the issuance.
The first trial ruled in favor of company A, stating that CBD is not classified as hemp. The Narcotics Control Act exempts hemp seeds, roots, and stems from being classified as hemp. The court stated, "If the cannabis resin from which CBD is extracted is derived from the exempted part of hemp (the stem), it cannot be classified as hemp." Although the association appealed, the second trial reached the same conclusion as the first.
However, the Supreme Court overturned the first and second trial's rulings, stating that CBD falls under the classification of hemp. The Supreme Court noted, "The Narcotics Control Act includes CBD as a major component of hemp and regulates it," adding that if CBD is determined to have been extracted from the exempted part of hemp, it would contradict the legislative purpose of the Narcotics Control Act.