A female office worker identified as A, who lives in Cheongna, Incheon, recently took a MyCab taxi she hailed with the Kakao T app on her way home from work. MyCab is an official affiliated brand operated by Kakao Mobility in the Seoul and Incheon areas. When she arrived at her destination and tapped her prepaid transit card on the terminal, a "payment completed" alert popped up on A's phone, the driver checked it, and A immediately got out. But shortly after she arrived in front of her home, the driver contacted her again. The driver said there was no record of payment approval on the terminal and asked her to pay again for a fare in the 30,000 won range.
When A refused out of concern for double payment, saying a "payment completed" alert had appeared, the driver pressed her again to pay, saying, "Then send it by bank transfer. If it's a duplicate, I'll refund it." During the back-and-forth, the phrase "I'll report this to the police" was even mentioned. A short time later, A received an alert from Kakao T that she had been reported as a passenger with unpaid fare. The message included the phrase "This may lead to a police accusation." It was a situation where a passenger whose payment had been processed normally was being held responsible for nonpayment by both the driver and the platform at the same time.
◇ Turning a blind eye even to system errors… structural weak points in Kakao T
According to Kakao Mobility on the 19th, Kakao T's direct payment function is structured so that the platform manages calls, dispatching, and trip records in an integrated way, but payment approval information is handled separately through payment processor and settlement company systems. For this reason, even if "payment completed" appears on a passenger's phone, an error can occur where it is not reflected in real time on the driver's terminal. Because of these structural weak points, disputes that make both customers and drivers victims are repeating.
A requested Kakao T customer center chat support to check the payment status, but even after A submitted the payment completion screen, the agent repeatedly replied only, "Direct payment cannot be looked up," and "Work it out directly with the driver." The consultation ended unilaterally with no action taken.
Kakao Mobility says it has no responsibility for payment errors despite being an affiliated taxi. A Kakao Mobility official said, "Unlike automatic payment, a transaction in which the customer chooses to pay directly is classified as a payment made outside the platform," adding, "Because it is not a payment through the platform, it is difficult to verify immediately. Cooperation from the settlement company is essential." The official went on, "According to the settlement company, there are cases where a failure occurs during a payment attempt and then a refund is processed, or where a delayed response occurs," adding, "Passengers must directly check with the settlement company's customer center."
However, critics say that in a structure where the platform manages everything through call, dispatch, and trip, shifting only payment errors to external responsibility increases user confusion.
A mobility industry official said, "Kakao Mobility is effectively a monopolist that controls more than 90% of the hailing market, so the practice of shifting responsibility to the outside in cases of system errors or disputes is a pattern only a dominant operator can use." The official added, "In particular, for Kakao affiliated taxis, the payment system itself sits atop the Kakao platform, making it hard to dodge responsibility," and said, "Even for general hails, as long as payment guidance is carried out on the platform, a response of 'the passenger should sort it out on their own' is hard to accept."
In response, a Kakao Mobility official said, "In the case of direct payment, because it is not a payment method that goes through the platform, there are many limitations in verifying details such as whether payment has been completed in real time on the platform."
◇ Repeated controversy over shirking responsibility amid market dominance
Kakao T is the largest taxi-hailing platform, with more than 14 million monthly active users (MAU). But despite its overwhelming market dominance, critics say the platform still lacks procedures to immediately verify facts or mediate when system errors or disputes arise.
Similar cases have recurred in the past. In the so-called "mistaken boarding automatic payment" incidents, where automatic payment was processed even though the passenger did not actually board, Kakao Mobility said it had "no authority to judge the fare" and directed complaints to local governments. The victimized passenger ultimately had to visit a police station to resolve the issue.
Even within the automatic payment structure, there have been steady reports of overcharging arising from abuse of the method where drivers enter fares directly into their app. In some regions, tollgate fees were even reflected twice, but Kakao Mobility's position is that "fares are under the jurisdiction of local governments."
There have also been repeated cases in which the Fair Trade Commission imposed a penalty surcharge over suspicions of so-called "call blocking and call funneling," which restricts rival hails and funnels calls to affiliated taxis. In the industry, the assessment continues that "Kakao Mobility's structurally dominant market power is cementing an environment unfavorable to consumers, drivers, and competitors alike." In the end, if an effectively monopolistic operator with a market share exceeding 90% does not establish basic verification procedures and a mediation system, similar harm is bound to recur.
Han Seok-hyeon, head of the Seoul YMCA Civil Mediation Office, said, "In a service like Kakao T where call, dispatch, trip, and payment occur within a single system, consumer protections are essential so that when a payment error or dispute occurs, the platform can at a minimum verify the facts and guide users through response steps, but it is not properly carrying out that role." Han added, "The passenger trusted the payment completed alert and got out, but the customer center telling them to 'handle it on your own' or unilaterally ending the consultation is an abdication of responsibility as a platform operator."
A Kakao Mobility official said, "Even after customer center consultations, we continue to communicate with passengers and drivers to identify the cause and work toward a resolution."