South Korea

Joongang Ilbo | English | News | Jan. 13, 2026 | Strikes and Work Stoppages

The Seoul city bus union is preparing for final negotiations on January 13, 2026, with the possibility of a general strike starting Tuesday morning if no agreement is reached. The talks are focused on disputes over the scope of “ordinary wages” and the size of this year’s pay raise. Labor and management will meet at the Seoul branch of the National Labor Relations Commission for a follow-up mediation session after wage and collective bargaining talks stalled since May 2025.

A key point of contention is whether regular bonuses should be included in ordinary wages, following rulings by the Supreme Court in December 2024 and the Seoul High Court in October 2025. The union claims this would push the effective pay increase to 12.8 percent, while management argues the recognized increase is about 6 to 7 percent and that the union’s overall demand would equal a 19 percent raise, which management calls excessive. They also cite fairness, noting that wage hikes in other large cities have remained around 10 percent.

The Seoul Metropolitan Government is preparing emergency responses, such as replacement bus services and additional subway trains, should the strike occur. After two planned strikes were called off last year, negotiations remain critical in avoiding disruption to Seoul’s public transport system.

디지털자산거래소 대주주 지분 제한 '논란'

ZD Net Korea | Local Language | News | Jan. 13, 2026 | Regulation

Regulators are considering imposing limits of around 15–20% on the stakes major shareholders can hold in domestic digital asset exchanges like Upbit and Bithumb. This proposal arises from the view that as these exchanges grow and resemble public infrastructure, restricting shareholder control may be necessary, similar to stock market exchanges. However, there is significant concern within and outside the industry that such regulation could extend beyond digital assets, potentially affecting other emerging sectors.

The Financial Services Commission has reportedly included this stake-limit measure in the upcoming “Digital Asset Phase 2 legislative bill” and has shared it with the ruling party's digital asset task force. Officials are looking at parallels with existing limits on alternative trading systems like NextTrade, which caps voting shares at 15%. If enacted, most major domestic digital asset exchanges could be forced to overhaul shareholder structures and governance models significantly, not just sell shares.

The proposal has drawn strong backlash due to its retrospective regulatory nature. Industry voices argue that imposing after-the-fact share dispersion on private companies conflicts with constitutional property rights and long-standing market stability principles. Unlike preemptive regulations applied to alternative trading systems at establishment, this would forcibly alter existing governance structures. There is also a lack of global precedent for such ownership limits in the volatile digital asset sector, and insufficient social consensus about the importance or concentration of exchanges to justify it.

Industry participants warn that changing ownership structures would slow management speed and weaken accountability, undermining competitiveness in a fast-evolving global market. They emphasize that founder-led strong leadership drives strategic decisions and innovation in nascent industries. Citing global exchanges like Coinbase, where founders maintain major stakes, the industry contends that retroactive governance changes could stifle entrepreneurial motivation and prompt firms to leave the domestic market.

Critics of the stake limits note the digital asset industry’s evolving nature, with platforms expanding beyond trade brokerage into custody, staking, and independent blockchain ecosystems, competing globally. Imposing ownership caps may hinder technological innovation, structural reorganizations, and international collaborations needed to keep pace with global competitors. Users can easily migrate to overseas platforms if domestic exchanges lose competitiveness due to these regulations.

The industry also highlights structural differences from securities markets, arguing that share-dispersion rules applied to stock exchanges to prevent conflicts of interest do not directly translate to digital asset exchanges where trade execution is consolidated. Examples include the NYSE and Nasdaq, which lack artificial share-ownership limits seen in banks. Domestic financial ownership rules are cited as potentially more stringent, with banks facing rigorous limits versus more permissive stakes in internet-only banks.

While the digital asset sector supports stronger market management and supervision targeting unfair trading and internal controls, direct intervention in ownership raises fundamentally different issues. Industry figures warn that institutionalizing governance changes based on company growth could set a precedent affecting other fast-growing industries like platforms, AI, and mobility, amplifying the controversy.

주병기 공정위원장 "쿠팡 개인정보 유출, 영업정지까지 검토"

ZD Net Korea | Local Language | News | Jan. 13, 2026 | Privacy

Joo Byung-ki, chairman of the Fair Trade Commission (FTC), announced that the ongoing investigation into Coupang's personal information leak may lead to a business suspension if Coupang fails to comply with corrective orders or if consumer harm cannot be remedied. The investigation is being conducted by a public-private joint team including the Ministry of Science and ICT and the Personal Information Protection Commission, with corrective actions to be determined based on its findings.

In addition to the information leak, the FTC is reviewing various unfair trade practices by Coupang. These include passing losses from low-price sales onto suppliers, which Chairman Joo described as predatory business practices. Other allegations under investigation involve false advertising of discount benefits for Coupang WOW members and coercing delivery app vendors to grant Coupang most-favored-nation treatment. The FTC is also nearing completion of a probe into Coupang's complicated and obstructive member withdrawal procedures.

Regarding corporate governance, the FTC is assessing whether Coupang chairman Kim Beom-seok and his family members' involvement in management qualifies him as the "same person" or head of the conglomerate. This review occurs annually, and a change in designation could be made if significant management participation by Chairman Kim or his relatives is confirmed.