Newsgather
Back|Court suspends antitrust watchdog's designation of Coupang founder
Court suspends antitrust watchdog's designation of Coupang founder
NACHRICHTAI
Yonhap News·15.05.2026·🇰🇷South Korea·Law

Court suspends antitrust watchdog's designation of Coupang founder

1 dk okuma¡%50 Ünem¡186 kelime
#coupang#antitrust#fairtradecommission#kimbom#yookim#seoulhighcourt#injunction
Y
Yonhap News
YayÄąncÄą
Schriftgröße

SEOUL, May 15 (Yonhap) -- A court has suspended the antitrust watchdog's designation of the founder of e-commerce giant Coupang Inc. as the company's de facto controlling entity, legal sources said Friday.

Coupang Corp., the South Korean unit of the U.S.-listed company, earlier filed a lawsuit and an injunction request with the Seoul High Court to overturn the Fair Trade Commission (FTC)'s designation of Kim Bom as the "same person" of the group last month.

"Same person" is a legal term referring to the individual who effectively controls a conglomerate.

Individuals designated as the same person are subject to tighter oversight by authorities, including disclosure requirements on intra-family transactions and rules governing holding company structures.

The court suspended the FTC's action on Thursday ahead of a hearing on the injunction request slated for June 16, according to the sources.

The suspension will be effective until July 15.

Coupang had previously qualified for an exception allowing the company itself, rather than an individual, to be designated as the same person.

The FTC said Coupang no longer meets key conditions for the exception, as Kim Bom's younger brother, Yoo Kim, is effectively involved in management as a vice president of Coupang.

This article was originally published by Yonhap News.

Related Stories

Election Nullification Lawsuit Hinges on Proving 'Result Would Differ If Ballots Sufficed'
NACHRICHTAI
law

Election Nullification Lawsuit Hinges on Proving 'Result Would Differ If Ballots Sufficed'

Legal experts are closely watching the aftermath of the June 3 local elections, where ballot shortages and voting disruptions occurred. Lawsuits challenging the election results may arise if it can be proven that the outcome would have changed had sufficient ballots been available. Voters unable to vote may also pursue constitutional complaints and state compensation claims.

Negativ
10 sa Ăśnce