An Jeongsang Committee Member: "'Frequency' Value Reflects Old Auction Prices... Concerns Over Procedural Legitimacy Damage"

Radio Act, Unclear Criteria for Reflecting 'Past Auction Prices'
Risk of Illegality, Concerns Over Confusion
Also Criticism on Fairness with Other Special Charges

[Asia Economy Reporter Koo Chae-eun] Concerns have been raised about potential illegality regarding the method of calculating the 'past auction price' for frequency reassignment fees, which are the 'rules of the war of money.' There is no legal provision for the standard of setting reassignment fees by reflecting the 'old auction price,' and issues of fairness with other special charges and loss of procedural legitimacy have been pointed out.

On the 21st, An Jeong-sang, Senior Expert at the Policy Committee of the Democratic Party of Korea, stated as a personal opinion, "If the past auction price is reflected, it will not only cause confusion by making it difficult to predict the level of frequency reassignment fees but also involve potential illegality." An pointed out, "The past auction price is only allowed to be 'considered' under Article 14 of the Radio Waves Act Enforcement Decree, but it does not specify within how many years from the reassignment point the auction price can be reflected or to what extent the ratio can be applied."

An further criticized, "As a result, operators seeking frequency reassignment cannot predict at all whether the government will reflect the past auction price during reassignment or to what extent it will be reflected." This makes it difficult to predict reassignment fees and prevents telecom operators from planning investments. He expressed concern that "the government may be forced to accept reassignment fees arbitrarily calculated without clear standards."

He also saw problems from the perspective of special charges. The Ministry of Science and ICT regards frequency reassignment fees as a 'special charge,' but Article 4 of the Special Charges Management Act stipulates that the criteria, methods, and rates for imposing charges must be clearly defined by law. An pointed out, "Unlike other laws that impose economic burdens such as charges, usage fees, and occupancy fees, only the criteria for calculating fees related to frequency allocation lack specific calculation methods, raising issues of fairness."

He also mentioned the need for industry opinion-gathering procedures to ensure administrative transparency. An said, "If the government unilaterally calculates reassignment fees without a procedure to listen to and consider opinions, it may lose procedural legitimacy. There is also a possibility of social conflicts such as administrative lawsuits." He suggested, "Through amendments to the Radio Waves Act, clear legal grounds and calculation standards should be established, and a process that sufficiently gathers opinions from mobile telecommunications operators should be guaranteed."

Meanwhile, the government and the telecommunications industry are sharply at odds over the reassignment fees for 3G and LTE frequencies, whose usage periods end in June and December next year. With the government announcing plans to present a solution by next month, the government's calculated amount is 5.5 trillion won, while the telecommunications industry's calculation is 1.6 trillion won, showing a gap of nearly 4 trillion won, indicating significant friction is expected. Contrary to the government's claim to reflect past auction prices, telecom companies only reflect 3% of the expected revenue during the allocation period, resulting in a substantial difference in perspectives.

This content was produced with the assistance of AI translation services.