SEOUL — A fierce standoff has erupted between Coupang, South Korea’s leading e-commerce platform, and government authorities following the company’s unilateral announcement regarding its internal investigation into a data breach affecting 33.7 million users. The conflict has intensified into a "head-on collision" as both parties exchange sharp rebuttals over the legitimacy of the investigation process.
On December 26, Coupang issued a statement claiming, "The investigation into the leaker was not a solo act but was conducted in close cooperation with the government over several weeks." This response came after critics slammed the company for conducting a "self-investigation" that lacked legal authority. Coupang went as far as releasing a detailed timeline, asserting that the government instructed the firm to directly question suspects and even hire divers to retrieve evidence from a river.
However, the police and other government agencies immediately debunked these claims. The Seoul Metropolitan Police Agency’s Cyber Crime Investigation Division countered, "There was no prior consultation or agreement with Coupang regarding suspect contact or evidence collection before December 21." The National Intelligence Service (NIS) also distanced itself, stating it was "not in a position to give instructions" and had issued none.
The core of the dispute lies in the handling of evidence. Coupang claims it deployed a forensic team and professional divers on December 18 to recover a laptop thrown into a river by the suspect, acting under government guidance. To support this, the company released video footage of the retrieval process. Coupang argued it endured criticism for a "delayed response" only to maintain investigative secrecy as requested by the state.
The backlash intensified after Coupang declared on Christmas Day that the case was virtually closed, claiming only 3,000 accounts—not 33.7 million—were affected and that all leaked data had been deleted. Legal experts and police officials warn that a suspect (Coupang) unilaterally collecting evidence without police supervision could constitute an abuse of power or "obstruction of justice."
"Contacting suspects and collecting evidence without coordinating with investigative agencies is a clear overstep," a police official stated. As the police consider a formal investigation into Coupang’s "self-investigation" process for potential destruction of evidence, the tension between the tech giant and the government shows no signs of abating.
[Copyright (c) Global Economic Times. All Rights Reserved.]
