E-Commerce Act Lawyer | Advisory support for online sellers and platforms

E-Commerce Act | Mandatory disclosures and pre-sale information duties

Most disputes under this statute start with something a seller failed to state clearly before the sale, not with the product itself.

Seller identification and business information

Online sellers must display their business name, registration number, address, phone number, and the name of the representative on the site before a transaction is completed (전자상거래법 제10조). This applies whether the seller operates its own site or sells through a marketplace listing, and missing or outdated information is one of the most common grounds for a consumer complaint to the Fair Trade Commission.

Contract and transaction record disclosure

Sellers must provide clear information on price, delivery cost, payment method, and withdrawal procedure before the contract is concluded, and must issue a confirmation of the contract content after payment (전자상거래법 제13조). Where this information is unclear or contradicts the actual product page, the seller bears the risk in a later dispute over what was agreed.

Advertising and misleading representation risk

Exaggerated or misleading claims about price, quality, or delivery timing can be reviewed both under this statute's disclosure duties and under the Act on Fair Labeling and Advertising, so advisory review of promotional copy before it goes live is generally more efficient than responding to a complaint afterward.

E-Commerce Act | Withdrawal rights, returns, and refund timelines

Refund disputes are the single largest source of consumer complaints against online sellers, and the statute sets specific deadlines that businesses are expected to know in advance.

The consumer's right to withdraw

A consumer may withdraw from an online purchase within 7 days of receiving the goods without needing to give a reason, subject to certain exceptions such as custom-made goods or products that have lost resale value (전자상거래법 제17조). Sellers who restrict this right through unilateral terms of service may find those terms unenforceable.

Refund deadline after withdrawal

Once a valid withdrawal is made, the seller must refund the amount paid within 3 business days of receiving the returned goods, and delaying beyond that period can itself become an independent basis for a complaint or a claim for statutory interest (전자상거래법 제18조).

Defective or mismatched products

If the goods delivered differ from what was advertised or are defective, the cost of return shipping generally falls on the seller rather than the consumer, and the 7-day withdrawal period does not apply in the same way — this is where sellers and consumers most often disagree about who caused the discrepancy.

E-Commerce Act | Fair Trade Commission review and administrative sanctions

Enforcement usually starts with a consumer complaint or a routine sector inspection, not a lawsuit — understanding that process changes how a business should respond.

Corrective orders and public disclosure

Where the Fair Trade Commission finds a violation, it may issue a corrective order requiring the business to fix the practice, and in certain cases publicize the violation, which carries its own reputational consequence independent of any fine (전자상거래법 제32조).

Administrative fines

Repeated or serious violations of disclosure, withdrawal, or refund duties can lead to administrative fines set according to the type and gravity of the violation (전자상거래법 제34조). Advisory intervention at the investigation stage — before a formal finding is issued — often has more room to shape the outcome than a response filed after the decision.

Business suspension for serious or repeat cases

In serious or repeated cases, the Fair Trade Commission can order suspension of all or part of the business's electronic commerce operations for a set period (전자상거래법 제32조), which is a materially different level of risk from a fine and usually warrants a written response prepared with legal advice.

E-Commerce Act | Platform and marketplace operator liability

Businesses that operate a marketplace rather than sell directly face a separate layer of obligations toward the sellers using their platform and the consumers who buy through it.

Platform's duty to identify sellers to consumers

A marketplace operator that merely provides a venue for third-party sellers must still disclose that it is not the seller of record and provide consumers with a way to identify and contact the actual seller (전자상거래법 제20조). Failing to do this clearly can expose the platform itself to liability that was originally the individual seller's.

Joint liability in certain circumstances

Where a platform operator represents itself as the seller, or fails to provide adequate seller-identifying information, it can bear liability alongside or instead of the actual seller for damage suffered by the consumer (전자상거래법 제20조의2). This is a frequent point of advisory review for growing marketplace businesses updating their terms of use.

E-Commerce Act | From initial review to resolution

E-Commerce Act | How advisory fees are calculated

※ Costs vary depending on case complexity and specific circumstances; exact fees will be provided during consultation. No specific outcome is guaranteed.

E-Commerce Act | Self-Check Before You Reach Out

Frequently Asked Questions

Official References

• Korea Law Information Center — https://www.law.go.kr
• Easy-to-Find Everyday Legal Information — https://easylaw.go.kr
• Korea Legal Aid Corporation — https://www.klac.or.kr
• Ministry of Employment and Labor — https://www.moel.go.kr