Jongno-gu Slaps a “Business Suspension” on a Globally Trending Online Matching Service… An Absurd Case Unfolds

[Choice Times=Seollae Kim, Staff Reporter]

“Are we being told that online matching services, which are a global trend, are not allowed in Korea? If a court were to readily accept such absurd desk-bound bureaucratic logic, I would have no choice but to make the serious decision to relocate the headquarters of ‘Couple.net’ to the United States.”

Lee Woong-jin, CEO of Sunwoo, Korea’s first matchmaking company, wrote the above in a post titled‘Couple.net Headquarters May Be Relocated to the U.S.’on a Naver café on the 25th.

Lee said, “An online matching service—Couple.net—that we built with genuine dedication has been forcibly pushed by Jongno-gu in Seoulinto the vague and outdated category of marriage brokerage,” adding, “Because we did not require users of the online matching service to sign contracts mandated for marriage brokerage businesses, Jongno-gu imposed an administrative penalty suspending operations from February 2 to February 28.”

Couple.net is an online-based matching (male–female dating) platform into which Sunwoo has invested more than 15 billion won over approximately 35 years.

Online matching services that connect people with potential partners based on individual preferences have been spreading globally in recent years.

Sunwoo was the first company in Korea to develop advanced information technology and launch an online matching service, later expanding overseas.

Online matching services are similar to “dating apps” regulated under e-commerce laws. In advanced countries such as the United States, they are classified as such. They are distinct from “couple matching,” which directly brokers marriages on a one-to-one basis.

Nevertheless, Jongno-guimposed a business suspension on Couple.net on the grounds that it failed to obtain “marriage brokerage contract forms” from its users.

While Couple.net faces no such regulations in countries it has entered—including the United States, Canada, the United Kingdom, Australia, China, and Japan—it has been blocked domestically in Korea.

Lee stated, “Under the Marriage Brokerage Act, marriage brokerage refers to activities premised on counseling and arranging marriages,” explaining, “Online matching services proceed without intervention by match managers and are conducted independently by members, and therefore do not constitute marriage brokerage.”

He continued, “Administrative regulation in Korea is truly enormous and frightening,” adding, “Over the past 35 years of doing business, whatever happened to the dignified, considerate public officials who cared about citizens? If we follow Jongno-gu’s demands, even online matching services—designed to allow people to meet easily and affordably—would have to charge membership fees of several million won.”

This represents a textbook case of outdated regulations interfering with and hindering new markets created by advanced information technology.

Lee added, “Last weekend, we filed a lawsuit seeking cancellation of the business suspension and a stay of execution,” and said, “If the court does not accept it, I will take it as a decision telling us not to do business in this country, leaving us no choice but to make a major decision.”

How did Jongno-gucome to impose such an administrative penalty on an online matching service in the first place?

According to Sunwoo, a Jongno-gu officialvisited the Couple.net office last May. At the time, Couple.net was promoting a couples’ travel event to the United States, Canada, Australia, and Japan.

The program involved Korean singles traveling together and meeting local Korean singles abroad. However, the district official claimed that this constituted “international marriage” and demanded that the advertising be halted.

Sunwoo explained that it was not brokering or arranging international marriages, but merely organizing meeting programs for Korean singles. Nevertheless, Jongno-guclassified it as “international marriage.”

Lee, who was staying in the United States on a business trip at the time, said that in order to avoid unnecessary friction with Jongno-gu, the company was forced to cancel the event despite having already invested in preparations.

It later emerged that the trigger was a complaint filed in March of the year before last by a user who had paid 300,000 won to join the online matching service and was dissatisfied with the outcome. Jongno-guunilaterally accepted the complaint.

Officials from Jongno-gualso reportedly demanded to see customer service phones used by Couple.net’s match managers during their office visit.

Sunwoo objected, stating, “These phones handle members’ personal data and cannot be shown for privacy protection reasons. It is excessive to demand access to customer service phones based on a single complaint from a user who used the online matching service a year and a half ago.” The dispute escalated before being settled through written exchanges.

A hearing was later held regarding the matter.

According to Sunwoo, the hearing moderator did not listen to the company’s position at all and instead unilaterally sided with Jongno-gu, leading to a heated exchange between the moderator and the company. The hearing was conducted entirely on the premise of treating online matching services as “marriage brokerage.”

Sunwoo emphasized, “If online matching services are regulated under the Marriage Brokerage Act while ignoring changes of the times, normal operation in Korea will be impossible,” reiterating, “If this business suspension is not resolved, we will have no choice but to consider relocating overseas.”

In the United States, online matching services such as dating apps or matchmaking platforms are handled within the framework of general commerce, consumer protection, and online service regulations. They do not bear legal responsibility for whether a marriage actually occurs.

Offline marriage brokerage companies that arrange immigration or international marriages, by contrast, may be required to submit licenses and are subject to strict regulations, including mandatory deposit contracts and rules aimed at preventing fraud and human trafficking.

In Korea, matchmaking businesses were originally operated as free businesses, then converted to a licensing system in 1973, later changed to a reporting system, and reverted to free business status in 1999. As international marriages increased, the Marriage Brokerage Act was enacted, and the industry currently operates under a reporting system.

Sunwoo argued, “Although the reporting system was introduced to keep track of the number of businesses, in reality more regulations are being applied than during the licensing era.”

#RegulatoryOverreach #OnlineMatching #BusinessFreedom #Coupledotnet