Nope. Bhutan created a mess of a refugee crisis when they evicted all Nepalese-speaking citizens in 1990. [0], [1]
There are still some refugees living in camps in Nepal, and it took over 10 years before some Western countries agreed to take them in. They are still slowly being resettled.
I know some of these refugees who spent the first 17 or 18 years of their lives in squalid camp conditions. They are lovely people.
I wouldn't call North Korea purposefully underdeveloped. It just refuses to accept foreign investment like every other country on the face of the planet. It's modernizing, albeit slowly and on its own terms.
If we'd been more active in engaging North Korea on friendly terms, maybe they would have developed along a similar route as China.
It seems like we're trying to squeeze them till they collapse, and North Korea are understandably doing all they can to be self-sufficient and not appear weak and desperate.
The problem is NK is nothing like China. NK leadership is nothing like China, opening them up would only make them militarily more dangerous to deal with. But I agree with you that there needs to be and end to this, but I have no idea how.
It actually describes Australia, which for the most part is uninhabited and undeveloped, and has massive amounts of mostly untouched wilderness.
Take a land mass the size of the lower 48 states, and take out all the people except for Oregon on the west coast and Florida on the east coast. Remove nearly all the interstates and all but three of the railroads. That is Australia.
Would it be even possible in today's world to have a country that is purposefully underdeveloped/feudal, but without an oppressive regime?