The Korea Industrial Promotion Agency, which ranked first in the online lecture market for civil service exams, was caught making false and exaggerated advertisements directed at test-takers, resulting in sanctions from the Fair Trade Commission.
On the 3rd, the Fair Trade Commission announced that it imposed a penalty surcharge of 1.09 billion won on ST Unitas, the operator of the Korea Industrial Promotion Agency, on suspicion of violating the Act on Labeling and Advertising (deceptive advertising). The Fair Trade Commission also issued a corrective order requiring the company to publicize the matter.
From June to August 2021, the Korea Industrial Promotion Agency advertised on its website that 70-80% of the total passers of the 2020 civil service exams for computer, social welfare, and nursing positions were students who took its courses. However, the actual pass rate was only 49-66%, leading the Fair Trade Commission to determine that the advertisement was false and exaggerated.
As the Fair Trade Commission's investigation began, the Korea Industrial Promotion Agency revised its advertising phrase, stating that it reflected 'statistics from a specific region only.' However, the Fair Trade Commission pointed out that such limitations were displayed in a size of only 0.2% of the overall screen and used gray text, making it difficult to recognize at a glance.
The Korea Industrial Promotion Agency used phrases such as 'ranked first in computer service exam books,' 'ranked first in sales,' 'ranked first in community mentions,' and 'ranked first in number of students,' but the basis for these claims was unclear. The Fair Trade Commission's investigation found that the sales and the number of students were based on the company's internal sales criteria, while the ranking of exam book sales was based on specific bookstores. The Commission judged that failing to clarify this information could lead consumers to mistakenly believe they ranked first in the entire civil service academy market.
A Fair Trade Commission official noted, 'It influences consumers' rational purchasing decisions and poses a risk of undermining fair transaction order in the civil service academy market, which is why we judged it as false, exaggerated, and deceptive advertising.'