SKB "Netflix has no intention to pay network usage fees... Billing amount expected to be hundreds of billions"

SK Broadband Legal Representative
Kang Sinseop, Attorney at Law Firm Sejong
Counterclaim Filed at Seoul Central District Court on the 30th
Claim Amount Subject to Court Appraisal

Kang Shin-seop, a lawyer at the law firm Sejong representing SK Broadband, stated on the 30th after submitting a counterclaim to the Seoul High Court, "We proceeded with the counterclaim because Netflix has shown no intention of paying the network usage fees even after the first trial ruling." Photo by Cha Min-young

[Asia Economy Reporter Cha Min-young] "We have proceeded with a counterclaim because Netflix has shown no intention of paying network usage fees even after the first trial ruling."

Kang Shin-seop, legal representative of SK Broadband from the law firm Sejong, stated this to reporters on the 30th after submitting the counterclaim to the Seoul High Court.

On the same day, SK Broadband filed a counterclaim against Netflix to claim network usage fees based on the civil law principle of unjust enrichment. The claim covers the actual network usage fees for the past three years.

In the first trial held at the Seoul Central District Court, a ruling was made in June against Netflix Services Korea, the plaintiff in the lawsuit seeking confirmation of non-existence of debt against SK Broadband. However, since Netflix has not complied with this ruling, the counterclaim has been pursued.

Attorney Kang Shin-seop said, "Netflix's arguments changed several times during the first trial process, and in this process, the court sided with SK Broadband," adding, "Netflix recently postponed its appeal, but the reason is currently unknown."

The counterclaim trial will be conducted alongside Netflix's main appeal case at the same Seoul High Court panel. Attorney Kang explained, "The purpose of the lawsuits is the same. One side claims there is no debt, and the other claims there is a debt and requests fulfillment, so they proceed together on the same day."

The specific amount claimed depends on the court's judgment. Attorney Kang said, "We will have to see the court's appraisal. This is not a common case. We have currently claimed 1 billion KRW as a partial amount, but the total is expected to reach several tens of billions of KRW."

The court is also expected to request an external appraisal for a more accurate judgment. It is anticipated that university research institutes or the Electronics and Telecommunications Research Institute (ETRI) may be involved, with recommendations from each party.

There is also a possibility that legal hearings involving related government ministries, which did not occur in the first trial, will take place. Attorney Kang said, "We will apply depending on the situation," and added, "The High Court is expected to show an open attitude."

He also addressed misunderstandings about double charging by SK Broadband. Attorney Kang pointed out, "The roles of global content providers (CP) and internet service providers (ISP) are clearly different," and noted, "What Netflix currently claims as a usage connection state is merely the use of IDs and passwords." He further explained, "If Netflix delivers high-definition videos like dramas through the general network, other general users would experience complete downtime, so ISPs have no choice but to install separate dedicated networks."

Meanwhile, Netflix stated, "If we receive the counterclaim submitted by SK Broadband, we will review it carefully in due course," and added, "We plan to continue seeking cooperative measures for the benefit of users shared with SK Broadband."

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