KEPCO "Pay More for Additional Electricity Usage"... 2.5 Billion Won Overcharge Detected

Kwonikwi "KEPCO to Refund 899 Users for Overcharged Amounts"

[Image source=Yonhap News]

[Sejong=Asia Economy Reporter Moon Chaeseok] Korea Electric Power Corporation (KEPCO) was caught by the government for excessively charging facility fees to some users when they applied for additional electricity usage beyond their existing consumption.

According to the Anti-Corruption and Civil Rights Commission (ACRC) on the 17th, they received a corruption report regarding this matter in June 2019, verified the facts, and then sent the related information to the Ministry of Trade, Industry and Energy, which notified them of the results of a full investigation last November.

According to KEPCO's "Electricity Supply Contract Enforcement Rules," when applying for additional electricity usage in residential complexes and the like, the lower of the design adjustment facility fee and the standard facility fee should be applied for distribution facilities and other facility fees. However, KEPCO uniformly applied the higher standard facility fee to some users.

The standard facility fee refers to the amount calculated when a user receives electricity through general supply equipment to use new electricity, while the design adjustment facility fee is calculated when electricity is supplied through low-voltage design adjustment facilities or special high-voltage design adjustment facilities. Both represent additional amounts users must pay to use new electricity, but KEPCO violated its own regulation that requires selling electricity at the cheaper of the two fees.

According to the ACRC, the Ministry of Trade, Industry and Energy's full investigation confirmed that KEPCO overcharged approximately 2.5 billion KRW in facility fees for 899 households. KEPCO is currently refunding the amounts to the affected households and is working on improving its operational system to automatically determine the appropriate facility fees.

Kim Gi-seon, Director of the ACRC's Review and Protection Bureau, stated, "Although the excessive collection of facility fees does not constitute corruption under the Anti-Corruption Act, the ACRC's detection of this was an effort to correct improper actions by a public institution that infringed on the rights and interests of the public," adding, "We will continue to do our best through institutional improvements to prevent recurrence of cases that infringe on the rights and interests of the public."