Korea Sanctions 3,050 Mobile Shops Over Sales-Practice Violations

South Korean regulators imposed 3,050 sanctions on mobile phone shops for sales-practice violations in the period following the repeal of the country’s handset subsidy law, new government data showed Sunday. More than half of the cases involved retailers failing to clearly explain what customers would actually pay for a device.

The figures cover the period from July 23, 2025, the day after the Mobile Device Distribution Improvement Act was repealed, through Sept. 16, 2026. They were provided by the Korea Media and Communications Commission to Democratic Party lawmaker Lee Yeon-hee, a member of the National Assembly committee overseeing science, information technology, broadcasting and communications.

Of the total sanctions, 1,659 cases, or 54.4 percent, involved violations of rules requiring retailers to separately disclose handset purchase expenses. Another 638 were categorized as other violations, while 393 involved failures to display required prior-approval certificates. Regulators also recorded 360 cases of remote activations.

The data indicate that problems with cost disclosure have accelerated this year. Authorities recorded 1,182 such violations between January and Sept. 16. The monthly tally reached 242 in August, about 2.8 times the 87 cases detected in the same month a year earlier. March and July also posted elevated figures, with 164 and 160 cases, respectively.

A retailer can violate the disclosure requirement by failing to explain the costs borne by a buyer or by obscuring the conditions attached to a discount. Examples include not distinguishing subsidies provided by a mobile carrier from those funded by a shop, or combining service-plan and device-price discounts into a single headline figure. Advertisements can also breach the rules when they omit conditions such as enrollment in a particular rate plan or acceptance of a specified contract term.

The repeal of the handset distribution law removed subsidy caps and some public-disclosure requirements. As a result, differences in subsidies based on their size or the type of subscription are no longer violations of that former law. Consumer-protection obligations remain in place under the Telecommunications Business Act, however. Retailers can still face sanctions for forcing customers to subscribe to particular plans or add-on services, using false or exaggerated advertising, or refusing access to optional contract discounts.

Lee called for a review of retailers’ duty to inform customers and stronger enforcement against unfair advertising. She said consumers should be able to understand the expenses they will actually bear when buying a phone and urged regulators to examine violations and operators in greater detail to reduce harm.