South Korea's Fair Trade Commission rejected voluntary corrective proposals from delivery platforms Baemin and Coupang Eats regarding allegations of abusing market power [2].
The decision signals a tightening regulatory stance against "gapjil," a term for the abuse of power by dominant companies toward smaller partners. If the regulator proceeds with sanctions, the platforms could face fines totaling several hundred billion Korean won [2].
The investigation centers on accusations that the platforms pressured partner merchants to maintain uniform pricing across different apps. According to the commission, the companies demanded that food prices and minimum order amounts be no higher than those listed on competing platforms [2].
Evidence presented in the case included communications from platform representatives to merchants. One Baemin manager said to a merchant that a lack of uniformity between platforms was unacceptable, while a Coupang Eats representative said that everything must be kept identical to other platforms [2].
Merchants reported that the platforms used threats to enforce these pricing rules. The companies allegedly warned that failing to comply with the price-matching demands would result in lower scores for the merchants on the apps [2].
Both Baemin and Coupang Eats submitted self-correction plans to resolve the disputes and avoid formal penalties. However, the Fair Trade Commission dismissed these proposals, saying they did not sufficiently address the systemic abuse of power [2].
“The platforms could face fines totaling several hundred billion Korean won.”
This regulatory crackdown highlights the growing tension between South Korea's digital platform economy and the small business owners who rely on them. By rejecting the voluntary corrections, the Fair Trade Commission is asserting that mere promises of change are insufficient to remedy the structural imbalance of power in the delivery market. A massive fine would not only impact the bottom lines of Baemin and Coupang Eats but also set a legal precedent for how price-parity clauses are viewed under South Korean antitrust law.
