Korea Shipping Association "Fair Trade Commission's Fine Imposition Regrettable... Will Pursue Administrative Lawsuit"

[Asia Economy Reporter Dongwoo Lee] The shipping industry expressed "deep despair as if the sky is falling and serious regret" on the 18th regarding the Fair Trade Commission's decision to impose fines totaling approximately 96 billion KRW on domestic and foreign shipping companies.

The Korea Shipping Association issued a statement titled "Regarding the Incorrect Ruling on Shipping Joint Conduct" in the afternoon, stating, "We will pursue administrative litigation to correct the Fair Trade Commission's erroneous judgment and restore the legitimacy of shipping joint conduct."

Earlier, the Fair Trade Commission decided to reduce the initially planned fine of about 800 billion KRW on 23 domestic and foreign shipping companies to a fine of approximately 96.2 billion KRW.

The association protested, saying, "Even if there are procedural flaws, the purpose of the Shipping Act, which permits joint conduct among shipping companies, must not be undermined," adding, "This is truly a case of the tail wagging the dog."

They further asserted, "We will petition for the prompt passage of the Shipping Act amendment bills proposed by lawmakers from both ruling and opposition parties to clarify the purpose of the law related to shipping joint conduct and prevent such confusion from recurring."

The association added, "Considering the issues revealed in the investigation and ruling on the joint conduct on Southeast Asia routes, we strongly request that the ongoing investigations into joint conduct on Korea-Japan and Korea-China routes be handled by improving laws and systems rather than stigmatizing shipping companies multiple times."

Association Points Out 10 Major Errors in Fair Trade Commission's Ruling

The association meticulously pointed out ten errors in the Fair Trade Commission's ruling and urged correction.

The association criticized, "The Shipping Act allows joint conduct as long as joining or leaving the joint conduct is not unfairly restricted, but the Fair Trade Commission ignored this." They also claimed, "Although auditing and rewarding or penalizing for tariff compliance during international tariff joint conduct are guaranteed acts under international agreements, the Fair Trade Commission disregarded this and considered the tariff audits and penalty impositions by the neutral committee as unfair restrictions on joining and leaving."

The shipping companies pointed out that it is problematic that the Fair Trade Commission portrayed the joint conduct as an act knowingly committed with illegality, despite the companies not recognizing any illegality as the conduct is guaranteed by law. Furthermore, the Fair Trade Commission issued competition restriction certificates to shipping companies in 1981 and excluded shipping joint conduct during the 1998 cartel comprehensive settlement, thus guaranteeing shipping joint conduct, but it abandoned this stance and made a self-contradictory decision.

The shipping companies explained that under the Shipping Act, they have carried out joint conduct under the supervision of the Ministry of Oceans and Fisheries for over 40 years, but the Fair Trade Commission ignored this and judged it as unfair joint conduct solely due to procedural flaws. They clarified that even if there are procedural flaws, the fundamental purpose of the Shipping Act permitting joint conduct cannot be undermined.

The association stated, "The joint conduct neither unfairly restricted competition nor unfairly gained profits, nor did it harm cargo owners, yet the Fair Trade Commission disregarded this," adding, "Various economic organizations representing cargo owners and over a thousand actual cargo owners have proven that no harm was caused, but the Fair Trade Commission ignored this."

Finally, they argued, "The Fair Trade Commission ignored the principle of free navigation in the shipping business, the consistently superior position of cargo owners, and the chronic oversupply of vessels, which are characteristics of the shipping market," and "The Fair Trade Commission seriously damaged fairness by excluding about 20 foreign shipping companies, including Japanese shipping companies, from the investigation without reasonable grounds."

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