[Editorial] Distribution Regulation Reform Must Go Beyond Ending Mandatory Store Closures

Vice Chair Park Yongjin of the Presidential Regulatory Rationalization Committee discussing the abolition of mandatory closure days for large discount stores is belated, but welcome. However, this discussion must not stop at abolishing mandatory closure days; it should lead to the normalization of distribution regulations as a whole, including restrictions on business hours, store opening regulations, and regulations on corporate supermarkets.

Regulations on large discount stores were introduced under the banner of protecting traditional markets and neighborhood commercial districts. But policy should be judged not by good intentions, but by results. Over the past 10 years or so, the retail market has changed significantly. Consumers no longer distinguish between offline stores and online delivery; they choose the more convenient option. Weekends and late-night hours have become important shopping times for dual-income households and single-person households. In this reality, the administrative practice of uniformly restricting business on specific days and at specific times no longer fits today’s consumer environment.

Above all, mandatory closure days have excessively restricted consumer choice. Weekends and late-night hours are important shopping times for dual-income households and single-person households. Nevertheless, if business is uniformly restricted on certain days, consumers will choose other, more convenient purchasing methods rather than offline stores. The reason discussion of abolishing mandatory closure days is necessary is not because it grants special favors to a particular retail format, but because it is a measure to expand consumer choice in line with changing lifestyles.

The problem does not end with mandatory closure days. Restrictions on business hours and store openings also do not fit the changed structure of the retail market. As analyses by KDI and the Korea Economic Research Institute (KERI) show, large discount stores and traditional markets or small and medium-sized supermarkets are difficult to regard as being in a completely substitutive relationship. Rather, they serve different consumer demands and may even operate complementarily within local commercial districts. Nevertheless, applying late-night business restrictions, online delivery restrictions, and store opening regulations only to large discount stores and corporate supermarkets runs counter to competitive neutrality across industries and is close to regulatory failure that ignores changed market realities.

It is also difficult to say that protection policies centered on regulation have led to stronger competitiveness for traditional markets. Restricting a competitor’s business does not automatically shift consumption to traditional markets. The experience of the past 10 years or so shows that business regulations have had clear limits in enhancing the structural competitiveness of traditional markets and neighborhood commercial districts. Traditional market revitalization must now be approached not by tying down large discount stores, but by enabling traditional markets to strengthen their own competitiveness within a changed consumer environment.

Therefore, this reform must not stop at abolishing mandatory closure days. First, regulations on the business hours of large discount stores and corporate supermarkets should be overhauled on the principle of complete abolition. Second, restrictions on online delivery should also be completely abolished or substantially eased in line with consumer welfare and the principles of market competition. Third, store opening regulations should be objectively evaluated in terms of their actual effects and costs so that they do not function as unnecessary barriers to entry. Fourth, support for traditional markets and neighborhood commercial districts should be redesigned to focus not on regulation, but on strengthening autonomous competitiveness.

Discussion of abolishing mandatory closure days is only the starting point for normalizing retail regulations. The Regulatory Rationalization Committee should use this discussion as an opportunity to boldly remove outdated retail regulations and establish market-friendly institutions that support consumer welfare, business innovation, and fair competition.

---

Original title: [논평] 규제합리화위원회가 연 유통규제 개혁 논의, 의무휴업 폐지에서 멈춰선 안 된다

Author: Center for Free Enterprise (CFE)

Date: 2026-06-11

Source: https://www.cfe.org/bbs/bbsDetail.php?cid=comment&pn=1&idx=29127