The Fair Trade Commission pointed out that SK Telecom's penalty-related terms were unfavorable to customers, leading to corrective measures; however, they appear to have little utility in the current USIM information hacking incident. Customers can cancel their contracts at any time if there are issues with the company, but if SK Telecom claims, 'We have no responsibility in this matter,' the Fair Trade Commission cannot determine the truth. Ultimately, unless SK Telecom voluntarily admits responsibility, the judiciary will likely reach a conclusion on the penalty issue.
According to competition authorities on the 9th, SK Telecom has stated in its mobile service terms that it exempts customers from penalties if the contract is terminated due to the company's fault. This means that even if customers who set a contract period to receive subsidies terminate the contract before it expires, they do not have to pay penalties if the reason for termination is due to SK Telecom's fault.
In the past, SK Telecom had required customers to pay penalties even when it was at fault. SK Telecom recognized only a narrow range of exemption reasons for penalties, such as termination within 14 days, the user's death or immigration, and the user's unawareness of penalties. However, in 2015, the Fair Trade Commission pointed out that such terms violated the law related to the regulation of terms and conditions.
According to lawmaker Choi Min-hee's office, the Fair Trade Commission at that time sent a notice document regarding the review of SK Telecom's terms, stating, 'Even when the business has a fault, the company requires separately defined penalties to be paid.' The commission pointed out that 'this clause imposes an excessive burden on customers without substantial reason regarding the obligation to restore status after contract termination or cancellation.'
However, just because the terms have been revised does not mean that customers can end their contracts with SK Telecom without paying penalties. In the case of the recent USIM information hacking incident, the circumstances under which data was leaked need to be determined as 'the company's fault' for penalties to be waived.
However, the entity determining this is not the Fair Trade Commission. The role of the Fair Trade Commission ends with reviewing the company's terms and filtering out unfair terms that are detrimental to consumers. The interpretation of terms can greatly affect consumer interests depending on the circumstances of an incident, and the Fair Trade Commission does not intervene in this interpretative phase.
A Fair Trade Commission official noted, 'The review of terms by the Fair Trade Commission is the process of examining the literature itself to ensure that there are no unfair elements for consumers in advance,' adding that '(determining who has the responsibility) is best left to the judgment of the judicial authorities.' This means that for customers to avoid penalties, they must receive a ruling from the court confirming that SK Telecom provided grounds for contract termination through litigation.
As there is no entity capable of enforcing penalty waivers unless they lose in court, SK Telecom is showing a lukewarm attitude. On the 7th, 19 days after the SK Telecom hacking incident, Chey Tae-won, the chairman of SK Group, appeared in public, stating, 'I hope matters such as the penalty issue are resolved to ensure customer convenience,' but he also noted that 'the issues of user equity and legal matters must be considered together.' He added, 'The SK Telecom board is continuously discussing this situation and I also hope for a good solution.'
Meanwhile, SK Telecom estimates that the average penalty per subscriber will reach at least 100,000 won. It also reports that if it does not charge penalties to customers switching to competitor telecommunications companies, it could incur losses exceeding 7 trillion won, considering three years of future revenues.