Fair Trade Commission: "Change 'Sdeume Gapjil' Terms with Hidden Extra Fees and Excessive Penalties"

Fair Trade Commission Orders Correction of Unfair Terms in Contracts of 18 Sdeume Companies

The government has taken measures to improve unfair terms and conditions of marriage preparation agency services, commonly known as 'Seudeume (studio shooting, dress rental, makeup)' companies. This move aims to curb the practices of businesses that have caused consumer harm through hidden additional charges and excessive penalty fees.

The Fair Trade Commission announced on the 12th that it reviewed the terms and conditions of 18 marriage preparation agencies and corrected six types of unfair contract terms, including clauses that separately charge essential service fees and clauses that ambiguously indicate additional charges and penalty fee standards.

Marriage preparation agencies are companies that provide Seudeume services, which are essential for engaged couples during the wedding preparation process, by partnering with individual vendors and offering these services through affiliated wedding planners. The review targeted 18 large-scale companies with many reported cases of consumer harm, including Directcoms, Aini Wedding Networks, Very Good Wedding Company, J Wedding, K&M Corporation, Blanc de Bomb, Majudirected, and How To Wedding Group.

As the newly coined term 'Weddingflation (wedding + inflation)' reflects the increasing burden of wedding preparations on young people, the Fair Trade Commission conducted an ex officio review of the terms and conditions of marriage preparation agencies to check for unfair clauses amid rising consumer complaints about hidden estimates and excessive additional and penalty fees.

Shin Yong-ho, head of the Special Transactions Division of the Fair Trade Commission, explained, "We focused on large companies with many consumer protection claims to conduct the review. If other companies have similar unfair contract terms, we can take corrective actions through reports or ex officio investigations."

According to the Fair Trade Commission, these marriage preparation agencies had terms that did not include essential services closely related to Seudeume as part of the basic service but structured them as separate options requiring additional fees.

Basically, the Seudeume package service includes only 'photography, dress rental, and makeup services,' while separately offering 20 to 30 options with additional fees, applying a dual pricing system.

For example, Company A stated, "An additional fee of 440,000 KRW or more is required to purchase original and retouched photo files," while Company B specified, "An early start fee is charged separately for makeup."

The Fair Trade Commission noted, "Some businesses themselves acknowledge these as essential items by marking them as mandatory purchases and explained that the dual pricing system is intended to make the basic package price appear lower, which attracts consumers. However, it is difficult to find any other reasonable justification for these terms that is not unfair to consumers."

Considering that consumers find it difficult to accurately recognize and compare the total cost of Seudeume services and that consumers are in a vulnerable position in transactions related to the important event of marriage, these clauses are deemed unfairly disadvantageous to customers.

The Fair Trade Commission stated, "Companies have corrected their terms to include the purchase fees for original and retouched photo files, dress fitting fees, and makeup early start fees as part of the basic provided services instead of separate items."

Clauses that ambiguously indicate detailed standards for additional charges and penalty fees were also deemed unfair. A representative example is a clause stating, "Penalty fees occur for each Seudeume company." For additional charges, the approximate price range was not indicated, placing consumers at a disadvantage as they must enter contracts without knowing the expected costs.

The Fair Trade Commission judged that clauses regarding additional charge prices and penalty fee standards were overly broad and unclear, constituting unfair contract terms disadvantaging customers. The commission explained, "Companies have revised their terms to specify the range of option prices and average penalty fee standards and to definitively notify customers of specific option prices and penalty fee standards once a particular Seudeume company is selected."

The commission also corrected a non-refundable clause that required customers to pay 20% of the total Seudeume package price as a deposit and prohibited refunding the deposit upon cancellation. Additionally, unfair liability exemption clauses that shift company responsibilities to customers, transfer prohibition clauses banning the assignment or transfer of services, and jurisdiction clauses were also amended.

The Fair Trade Commission stated, "It is significant that we actively corrected the terms that formed the basis of unfair and unreasonable trade practices in the Seudeume sector, which is the area where approximately 400,000 engaged couples have expressed the greatest inconvenience."