[Invest&Law] Google 69.2 Billion, Meta 30.8 Billion Fine Decision on Next Month 23

Yonhap News

The verdict in the administrative lawsuit worth 100 billion KRW filed by Google and Meta against the Personal Information Protection Commission (PIPC) will be announced on the 23rd of next month. Attention is focused on what judgment the court will make in this case, where the government and global big tech companies are clashing over the largest fine imposed for violating personal information protection regulations.

The Administrative Division 2 of the Seoul Administrative Court (Presiding Judge Go Eun-seol) held the final hearing on the 5th for the lawsuits filed by Google and Meta respectively against the PIPC, seeking cancellation of corrective orders and other dispositions.

In September 2022, the PIPC found that Google and Meta violated the Personal Information Protection Act by collecting behavioral information (online activity information that can identify users' interests and tendencies) without users' consent and using it for online personalized advertising. The commission imposed fines of 69.2 billion KRW on Google and 30.8 billion KRW on Meta. It also issued corrective orders requiring these companies to ensure that users clearly recognize and consent to the collection of personal information such as website usage records. This was the first sanction by the Korean government related to the collection and use of behavioral information on online personalized advertising platforms. Google and Meta filed lawsuits in February last year, claiming the PIPC's dispositions were unfair.

At the final hearing, Google and Meta argued that the PIPC's dispositions were illegal and that there were issues with the fine calculation procedures, so all should be canceled.

Google’s legal representative stated, “The entity that decides to use and collect users' behavioral information is not Google but the website or app service providers,” adding, “Web and app providers ultimately use the collected behavioral information for customer acquisition or site optimization.” Although the platform provides information collection tools (pixels, SDKs, etc.), whether to install and use them is decided by the web/app providers.

Meta’s legal representative also said, “The subjects collecting behavioral information are web/app providers, and advertisers obtain consent for personal information collection and transmission,” adding, “In countries like Australia, obligations as behavioral information collectors are imposed on advertisers such as web/app providers.”

On the other hand, the PIPC argued, “The behavioral information at issue in this case pertains to activity information related to an individual’s intimate private life,” and “However, this information is embedded in web/app source code, making it difficult to verify whether it was illicitly obtained, and unlike behavioral information generated and processed automatically during direct use of the service, it has the unique characteristic of being difficult for users to recognize its use.”

They continued, “The vast majority of Google’s actual users are unaware that their personal information is collected through terms and conditions and that Google earns enormous revenue from it,” and “Various regulations, legislation, and rulings regarding the risks of behavioral information collection are being made overseas, including in the European Union (EU).”

The court stated, “The key issue in this trial is whether Google is the subject of personal information collection,” and set the verdict date for January 23 of next year. Kim & Chang law firm represents Google and Meta in this case. The PIPC side is represented by prosecutors from the Ministry of Justice’s International Legal Support Division and law firms Minhoo, Haegwang, and Choi Seon.

Hong Yoon-ji, Reporter for Legal Times