This study aims to identify distribution channels of imported rice and the current status of its illegal marketing, and examine the applicability of measures to prevent illegal marketing. The price of imported table rice, which has been sold since 2006, is 64.9% of the domestic rice price, causing illegal marketing of imported rice. Its illegal marketing has soared since 2011. The number of illegal marketing that was caught seems to have risen significantly, as country of origin labeling expanded to all restaurants from February 2011. Currently, illegal distribution of imported rice is controlled on the grounds of ‘the Grain Management Act’ and ‘the Act on Country of Origin Labeling of Agricultural and Fishery Products’. However, illegal marketing cases are increasing. As the press highlights illicit distribution of imported rice, various measures to prevent it are presented including rice traceability and a ban on mixing domestic and foreign rice.
As a result of examining the measures to prevent illegal marketing, it is inappropriate to introduce a rice traceability system as the measure to prevent illegal marketing of imported rice, because it is inconsistent with the concept and purpose of traceability. The main purpose of implementing a traceability system is to trace back causes quickly in case of food safety problems. Also, recording and maintaining production and transaction information is expected to cost much since many producers, distribution and processing companies, and restaurants are involved to a rice traceability system. Therefore, a complete form of traceability is difficult to be introduced immediately.
Second, implementing a marketing traceability system for only imported rice has a high possibility of causing trade conflicts according to the violation of WTO regulations (GATT Article 3). Accordingly, it will be hard to mandate imported rice traceability without domestic rice traceability.
Third, a ban on repacking imported rice is effective in preventing illicit marketing, but has a high possibility of violating the WTO TBT (Technical Barriers to Trade) agreement.
Fourth, although the ban on mixing domestic and foreign rice may limit creating various forms of products and consumers' needs, it may be possible to introduce the ban to the extent that it does not violate the WTO regulations.
It is not proper to implement a rice traceability system as the measure to prevent unlawful distribution of imported rice. Nevertheless, the base of traceability is needed to trace back and recall rice when rice safety problems occur. At the production stage, continuous education and promotion are necessary to keep production and sales records. Also, it is necessary to induce RPCs(rice processing complexes) and commercial rice mills to keep rice purchase and sales records.
Illegal marketing of imported rice can continue to occur as long as the price gap between domestic and foreign rice exists. Accordingly, continuous country of origin management and crackdowns are needed, and penalty levels should be increased. In addition, it is realistic to strengthen education for businesses participating in imported rice auction, and encourage to keep sales records.


Researchers: Tae-Hun Kim and Ji-Yeon Kim
Research period: 2014. 1. - 2014. 3.
E-mail address: taehun@krei.re.kr