Eight out of every 10 requests filed with the courts this year by companies seeking to halt enforcement of Fair Trade Commission (FTC) sanctions were granted, according to data released Thursday. Analysts say the figures show the courts are putting a legal brake on the FTC, which has pursued an aggressive enforcement drive since the Lee Jae-myung administration took office. More recently, a growing number of companies have gone to court to suspend even the FTC's initial investigative steps.
Companies filed 39 requests for suspension of enforcement with the courts over FTC actions this year, according to data submitted by the FTC to the office of Rep. Seo Il-jun of the People Power Party, a member of the National Assembly's National Policy Committee. Of those, 18 were granted in full and 13 in part, meaning the courts accepted 31 requests, or 79.5% of the total. Two requests, or 5.1%, were rejected, and the remaining six have yet to be decided.
A request for suspension of enforcement is a procedure in which a company asks the court to halt an FTC action until a ruling is issued in the main case, leaving the question of whether the action was lawful to be settled later. For example, if the FTC orders a company to pay a fine, the company may file suit to contest the order and simultaneously request a suspension of enforcement. If the court grants the request, the action is put on hold until the main case is decided.
The rate at which such requests are granted has been rising. Over the 10 years from 2016 to 2025, companies filed 360 requests for suspension of enforcement, of which 156 were granted in full and 65 in part — a combined acceptance rate of 61.4%. Rejections totaled 131, or 36.4%. By year, the acceptance rate rose from 64.5% in 2024 to 73.5% last year and 79.5% this year. The rejection rate, by contrast, fell sharply from 32.3% in 2024 to 23.5% last year and 5.1% this year.
A granted suspension does not mean the court has made a final determination that the FTC action was wrong. Such decisions turn on factors including whether enforcing the action before the main case is resolved would cause a company harm that is difficult to reverse. Whether the action itself was lawful is decided separately in the main case.
This year, companies have moved their legal challenges forward from the FTC's final rulings to the investigation stage. Hanwha (000880) is a case in point. The company sought a suspension of enforcement targeting an order to submit documents that the FTC issued while investigating allegations of intra-group transactions involving trademark royalties among affiliates. The Seoul High Court granted the request on the 9th of last month, suspending the effect of the document submission order until Jan. 31 next year. FTC Chairman Joo Byung-ki said there had been no procedural problems with the investigation, adding that it was deeply regrettable that an FTC investigation had been neutralized by a company's injunction suit.
Coupang (CPNG) went a step further, filing a request to suspend the FTC's decision to conduct an on-site inspection itself. The Seoul High Court rejected the request on the 23rd of last month, finding that suspending the inspection would have a greater impact on the public interest. An FTC official said the request was rejected because the agency demonstrated that an on-site inspection would cause Coupang no irreparable harm or damage.
Lee Hwang, a professor at Korea University School of Law, said that when disputes over investigative methods or investigative authority itself escalate, companies and the FTC end up in an unnecessary war of attrition before the substance of any violation has even been established. He added that if the FTC opts for compulsory investigations instead of voluntary ones, the burden on companies will inevitably grow.
