[Chamtrue?] Is the Reseller Selling Pokemon Bread at Triple Price Guilty of Hoarding?

Legal Community: "Private 'Bbang' Transactions... Difficult to Punish"

[Image source=Yonhap News]

The 'Pokemon Bread,' re-released after 16 years, is so popular that it has caused a shortage frenzy. Despite selling 1.5 million units in just one week due to overwhelming demand, many customers leave empty-handed after visiting supermarkets or convenience stores because of limited supply.

The main reason for its popularity is the character stickers included inside the bread packaging. Phenomena such as "open run" (lining up before the store opens), some convenience store owners bundling products for sale, and resellers hoarding and reselling have also emerged.

Currently, on secondhand trading sites, there are numerous listings offering "unopened Pokemon Bread" at around 5,000 won, more than three times the consumer price of 1,500 won. Recently, posts on an online community went viral, showing warnings sent to such sellers threatening to report hoarding to the Fair Trade Commission. Those unable to obtain the product are even calling for legal action.

However, legal experts believe it is difficult to prosecute Pokemon Bread resellers criminally. Article 7 of the current Price Stabilization Act prohibits hoarding acts by business operators who, for the purpose of profiteering, hoard goods or avoid selling them, as designated by the Minister of Economy and Finance when such acts are deemed likely to disrupt price stability. The enforcement rules designate masks and urea solution as prohibited hoarding items, but "bread" is not included.

It is also difficult to punish transactions by individuals who are not professional businesses. At the end of last year, a court acquitted a defendant prosecuted for violating the Price Stabilization Act by selling masks at high prices during the COVID-19 outbreak, citing insufficient evidence to prove that the defendant was a "new mask seller after 2020" and that the act was done "for profiteering." At that time, Judge Won-Jung Lee of the Seoul Central District Court Criminal Division 19 stated, "The 'purpose' of profiteering is a strict subject of proof," and "the prosecution must directly prove it by demonstrating indirect facts significantly related to the purpose."

Attorney Ji-Soo Choi (head of the Choi Ji-Soo Law Office) said, "South Korea does not have specific legal measures to punish individual reselling activities," adding, "However, if products past their expiration date (with opened packaging) are sold, charges under the Food Sanitation Act may be applied."