俯卧撑

Coupang turns away antitrust inspectors in unprecedented move as FTC chief threatens criminal referral_我的网站

一 |     Coupang has sued to halt a Fair Trade Commission inspection into whether price-matching coupon costs were shifted to suppliers.                    Coupang trucks are parked near the e-commerce platform's logistics center in Seoul on Dec. 29, 2025. YONHAPCoupang has repelled attempts by inspectors from the antitrust watchdog to launch an on-site inspection over allegations that the e-commerce powerhouse shifted costs to suppliers. In rebuffing the Fair Trade Commission (FTC) officers, the company said that it has not received a legally required notice prior to the inspection. FTC Chairman Ju Biung-ghi said after the failed raid on Wednesday that he will pursue criminal charges.Coupang's refusal to comply with an on-site investigation by the FTC marks the first time since the regulator was established that a company has rejected an inspection outright, in this case on the grounds that "the law was applied improperly."The commission attempted to launch inspections at Coupang on four occasions, from Aug. 19 to Friday and again on Monday, but withdrew each time.Investigators were seeking to determine whether Coupang improperly passed the cost of its "price-matching coupons" on to its suppliers.The coupons are issued automatically when a product sold on the platform is priced higher than on a competing online marketplace, bringing the actual purchase price down to roughly the lowest available. The commission is examining whether the resulting discount costs were shifted onto suppliers.Coupang's argument against the investigation revolves around a notification clause in the law that was not applied. Article 17 of the Framework Act on Administrative Investigations requires an administrative agency, as a general rule, to notify the subject of an on-site inspection in writing at least seven days in advance.                    The Korean headquarters of e-commerce platform Coupang in Songpa District, southern Seoul NEWS1In a statement on Tuesday, Coupang said the notice requirement is "a lawful procedure that guarantees the interests and rights of the party under investigation" and that the company "plans to seek a court ruling on the commission's failure to observe that procedure."However, the same article stipulates that the notice "may be presented to the person subject to investigation simultaneously with the commencement of the administrative investigation or the purposes" when "it is deemed impossible to achieve the purposes of the investigation due to an anticipated destruction of evidence."The commission's position is that the exception applies here because advance notice would have created a risk of evidence destruction. Coupang counters that this investigation does not meet the conditions for the exception.The e-commerce titan argues that the concern is not credible given that it cooperated with other extended on-site inspections at its headquarters by the commission and other government agencies from January, following a massive personal data breach.The outcome now rests with the courts. On Friday, Coupang filed a suit seeking to cancel the commission's decision and disposition authorizing the on-site inspection, along with an injunction to halt the investigation.                    Delivery trucks wait at a Coupang logistics center in Seoul. YONHAP"It is unusual for an on-site inspection by the commission to fall apart because the company under investigation refused it," an industry source told the JoongAng Ilbo. "Depending on the court's decision, the commission's overall practice of conducting on-site inspections without advance notice could be shaken, and other companies under investigation could demand procedural rights the way Coupang has."The ruling liberal Democratic Party sharply criticized Coupang's refusal to comply with the investigation, saying no company can stand above Korean law."Coupang is using claims of discrimination against U.S. companies by the U.S. government and political circles as a shield to evade legitimate domestic regulation and investigation," DP spokesperson Lee Yong-woo said Wednesday in a written statement. "The company's double standard, enjoying enormous profits in the Korean market but invoking its status as a U.S. company only when it is time to take responsibility, is infuriating."。