[Editorial] As KFTC’s Exclusive Right to File Complaints Is Overhauled, Measures Are Needed to Prevent a Flood of Cases

The exclusive right to file criminal complaints, which the Korea Fair Trade Commission (KFTC) has monopolized for 46 years, is now on track for a full-scale overhaul. KFTC Chairperson Joo Byung-ki announced at a meeting of the State Council of South Korea a reform plan under which citizens or companies, once they gather a certain number of supporters, would be able to directly file complaints over alleged violations of the Fair Trade Act, and the authority to request such complaints would be greatly expanded to local governments nationwide.
This proposal stems from long-standing criticism of the harms caused by the exclusive complaint system. Former KFTC officials have often been rehired by large law firms, fueling controversy that they mainly protect major conglomerates. Critics have argued that the exclusive complaint authority has degenerated into a tool for shielding chaebol. At the same time, the system has also functioned as a safeguard to prevent excessive criminal complaints.
Views on the exclusive complaint right are sharply divided. Consumers tend to favor mechanisms that allow them to seek redress easily. Companies, on the other hand, are understandably wary that abolishing the system could trigger a wave of excessive and indiscriminate complaints. Taking both sides into account, the system was originally designed so that only the KFTC could exercise the authority to file criminal complaints.
The move toward abolishing the exclusive complaint right is not only about preferential treatment for former officials. It also reflects the fact that the KFTC, while monopolizing this authority, has often failed to exercise it properly. President Lee Jae-myung of South Korea pointed out at a State Council of South Korea meeting on the 31st, "Because the KFTC monopolizes this authority, it effectively also holds the power to bury cases," highlighting the same concern.
Even if the system is overhauled, including the possible abolition of the exclusive complaint right, policymakers must carefully examine the consequences that may follow before making a final decision. From the standpoint of consumer protection, it may seem desirable to scrap a system that has produced many abuses. However, it is also necessary to scrutinize in detail whether the shockwaves from a complete abolition would truly serve the broader interests of society.
If the exclusive complaint right is fully abolished, there is a real possibility that complaints will pour in like a bursting dam. Allowing citizens above a certain number to file complaints directly, or greatly expanding the entities authorized to request complaints to local governments across the country, could lead to a deluge of cases. In particular, rival companies might deliberately exploit the system to threaten or pressure their competitors.
An even greater concern is that small and medium-sized enterprises could become prime targets. A significant portion of the KFTC’s current cartel investigations already involves smaller firms rather than large conglomerates. As the number of potential complainants grows, legal risks will increase for SMEs that lack sufficient resources to respond. A system intended to protect aggrieved consumers could end up inflicting serious damage on smaller businesses.
If the government pushes ahead with reform simply because the direction appears right in principle, it may create more side effects. The intent and rationale are understandable, but there are many potential problems that could arise from completely abolishing the exclusive complaint right. Even if the system is scrapped, the conditions and standards for complaints by other actors must be defined strictly and expanded only in stages. That is the way to minimize unintended consequences. The government should listen carefully to consumers, businesses, and experts, and then craft a realistic reform plan that fits the situation on the ground.