This article was published on May 18, 2025, at 5:53 a.m. on the ChosunBiz RM Report site.
The home meal replacement (HMR) market is rapidly growing after the COVID-19 pandemic, leading to an increase in controversies over origin labeling. Typically, origin labeling issues begin with complaints, and there has been a rise in cases where final acquittals are reached after going up to the courts.
According to the National Agricultural Products Quality Management Service, 67 violating companies were identified during a crackdown on telemarketing origin labeling conducted from the 14th to the 25th of last month targeting online platforms and shopping malls. It was found that the most frequent violation cases involved mislabeling products made from foreign raw materials as domestic.
Examples of origin violations include ▲ indicating products made with Chinese red beans as domestic ▲ marking the origin of processed meat products made with Australian beef as domestic, raising concerns of consumer confusion ▲ failing to display the origin of Chinese garlic on intermediary sites.
Recently, the distribution industry reports that cases of origin labeling controversies have been steadily increasing. The main reason cited is the rapid expansion of the home HMR market after COVID-19.
According to the Korea Agro-Fisheries & Food Trade Corporation (aT), the Korean HMR market has grown from 3.2 trillion won in 2018 to 7 trillion won in 2023. An industry official noted, “The market has rapidly expanded, but the systems and workforce of HMR companies have not kept up, leading to frequent mistakes in origin labeling.”
In a situation where HMR is being developed using the names of popular restaurants or well-known chefs, there are often cases where less attention is paid to online shopping mall marketing.
An anonymous HMR industry official said, “Small food companies offer poor salaries and benefits, resulting in frequent personnel changes,” and noted that “the personnel responsible for online shopping mall advertising are often hired as temporary workers.”
In the food industry, the controversy over Theborn Korea's 'Ddeopjuk controversy' is seen in a similar context. Problems arose from Theborn Korea’s claim of using “domestically produced kelp, shrimp, and anchovies to make a special broth” and “the crowning touch of the ddeopjuk topping, natural shrimp.” The back of the product packaging, however, indicated that the shrimp was from Vietnam.
A representative from Theborn Korea stated, “The origins of the broth and topping were different. The topping was from Vietnam, while the broth was domestic, and we did not confirm the natural status. It was a mistake by the staff. We acknowledge the error, have corrected it, and will prevent such incidents from happening again.”
However, situations like this are often taken into account during legal responsibility discussions. Legal professionals report that cases of unintentional origin labeling omissions commonly receive acquittals.
There have been several similar rulings. According to the Food Law Research Institute, a notable case involves Company A, which sold a set of dried pollack while advertising it as a 'domestically produced Jinburyeong dried pollack gift set' but actually used Russian ingredients. Despite being embroiled in origin labeling controversies, the company was ultimately acquitted because the detailed information on the sales site indicated both 'Russian' and 'domestically processed,' which could confuse consumers. The National Agricultural Products Quality Management Service became aware of the incident through complaints and investigated, and the company was charged in a summary format.
However, the court noted that it was clear that a new employee had taken over the duties after the departure of the employee previously in charge of design, and acknowledged that the mistake arose from their lack of experience. The fact that the employee overseeing the sales site did not intentionally direct this also contributed to the acquittal decision.
Kim Tae-min, head of the Food Law Research Institute (lawyer), remarked, “Most labeling violation cases follow a similar process. As a food law specialist, I have had many cases disposed of without charges or with deferred prosecution.”
Controversies over origin labeling at restaurants have also resulted in many similar court rulings. One case involved a restaurant in Daejeon, where the owner created and sold menu items using pork and processed meat products like spam between February and January 2020, but only recorded the origin as 'domestically produced' on the origin labeling board.
The prosecution viewed this as a false origin indication and charged the restaurant for violating the 'Act on Indicating the Origin of Agricultural and Fishery Products,' but the court ruled it as not guilty. The court's decision was based on the fact that the restaurant used domestically produced raw pork, and thus labeled it as such, having no reason to deceive consumers about the origin of the spam, which was left unmarked.
A legal insider noted, “Theborn Korea is currently under investigation by the police due to complaints related to origin labeling issues. While there are indeed some problems, it is likely that the final legal disputes will conclude with acquittals,” adding that if it is demonstrated that there was no intentionality and it was merely negligent, the outcome may favor them.