Compliance Radar

Who was sanctioned, and for what?

Fines, court rulings and incidents from Europe, North America, Latin America, Asia-Pacific, Middle East and Africa: 2,033 cases from 44 jurisdictions, each with an official source and checked against that source before publication. Filter by country, area of law and sector. Click a chart to drill down one level.

3cases from 1 jurisdiction
€27.1mTotal of monetary amounts
€14.4mLargest single case: Meta Platforms, Inc.
€8.51mMedian per case with an amount

Click a bar to drill down one level.

Where?

by authority
  1. Personal Information Protection Commission (PIPC, 개인정보보호위원회) €27.1m 100 % · 3 cases

What for?

by action
  1. Fine €27.1m 100 % · 3 cases

Who?

by sector

All sectors

  1. Media and online platforms €14.4m 53 % · 1 case
  2. Financial services and insurance €12.6m 47 % · 2 cases

When?

per quarter, by date of decision
Trend
PeriodCasesTotal
Q4 20230–
Q1 20240–
Q2 20240–
Q3 20240–
Q4 20242€18.6m
Q1 20251€8.51m
Q2 20250–
Q3 20250–
Q4 20250–
Q1 20260–
Q2 20260–
Q3 20260–
Q4 20260–

3 cases

26 Mar 2025 Woori Card Co., Ltd.Woori Card: 13.451 billion KRW after a branch used merchant data for card marketing South KoreaMarketing and consent €8.51m

From July 2022 to April 2024, the Incheon sales branch of Woori Card Co., Ltd. looked up data on at least 207,538 owners of card-accepting merchants in the merchant management system, including resident registration numbers, and passed it via chat and e-mail to card recruiters, who used it to market new credit cards; 74,692 of those affected had not consented to marketing. The authority also criticised excessively broad access rights and the company’s failure to intervene despite more than 30 million look-ups and downloads a month, and imposed a penalty surcharge of 13,451,000,000 KRW. It ordered a review of internal controls, training and supervision of staff, minimised access rights and regular log reviews.

What organisations can take from it

Access rights to customer databases must be limited to what is necessary and bulk look-ups monitored automatically – otherwise a sales branch becomes a data source for sales.

Relevance to training and awareness

Purpose limitation and data misuse by employees

Missing or inadequate training played a role in the decision.

Authority / court
Personal Information Protection Commission (PIPC, 개인정보보호위원회)
Area of law
Data protection · Marketing and consent
Legal basis
Personal Information Protection Act (개인정보 보호법) Art. 18(1), Art. 24-2(1), Art. 29; Sanktion nach Art. 64-2(1) Nr. 1
Action
Fine
Status of proceedings
unknown
Sector
Financial services and insurance
Mitigating circumstances
Reduction of 50% for an ISMS-P certification; increase of 25% because the infringement lasted around one year and nine months.
Liability of senior managers
Measures against individuals are not set out here.
Published
27 Mar 2025

Original amount 13,451,000,000 KRW, converted at the ECB reference rate of 26 Mar 2025.

Checked against the official source on 4 Oct 2026 · Direct link

Report an error

Anonymous: we store only your text, no contact details and no IP address.

11 Dec 2024 Hyundai Marine & Fire Insurance Co., Ltd.Hyundai Marine & Fire: 6.198 billion KRW for manipulative consent pop-up South KoreaMarketing and consent €4.12m

Hyundai Marine & Fire Insurance showed users of its online car insurance premium calculator who had declined consent to product marketing a further pop-up, swapped the effect of its buttons in July 2022 and mentioned neither the processing of data nor the mandatory information in it; the consents obtained in this way were invalid, and other insurers copied the pattern. The authority imposed a penalty surcharge of 6,198,000,000 KRW and ordered lawful consent, deletion of data from abandoned premium calculations and stronger internal controls with independent powers for the chief privacy officer. In the same session eleven further direct insurers were sanctioned, including AXA General Insurance (2,715,000,000 KRW) and Hana Insurance (273,000,000 KRW). The amount and the facts have not been confirmed against the primary source.

What organisations can take from it

A refusal that is turned into consent by a second pop-up is not valid consent – consent flows belong with the data protection officer before launch.

Relevance to training and awareness

Dark patterns in marketing consent

Authority / court
Personal Information Protection Commission (PIPC, 개인정보보호위원회)
Area of law
Data protection · Marketing and consent
Legal basis
Personal Information Protection Act (개인정보 보호법, frühere Fassung) Art. 39-3(1), Art. 31(2), Art. 21(1); Sanktion nach Art. 39-15(1) Nr. 6 a. F.
Action
Fine
Status of proceedings
unknown
Sector
Financial services and insurance
Repeat case
no
Mitigating circumstances
Reduction of 50% because no penalty had been imposed in the preceding three years, a further 30% for reasons including cooperation with the investigation and finally 40% following the Commission’s deliberations; increase of 25% because the infringement lasted from July 2022 to September 2023.
Liability of senior managers
Marketing and direct sales were able to design the consent flow without any involvement of the chief privacy officer (CPO); the authority found a breach of former Art. 31(2) and ordered that the CPO be given independent powers.
Published
12 Dec 2024

Original amount 6,198,000,000 KRW, converted at the ECB reference rate of 11 Dec 2024.

Checked against the official source on 4 Oct 2026 · Direct link

Report an error

Anonymous: we store only your text, no contact details and no IP address.

4 Nov 2024 Meta Platforms, Inc.Meta: 21.62 billion KRW for using sensitive data for advertising without consent South KoreaMarketing and consent €14.4m

Through Facebook profiles and usage behaviour, Meta Platforms, Inc. collected sensitive characteristics of around 980,000 users in Korea – such as religion, political views or same-sex marriage – and made advertising topics built on them available to around 4,000 advertisers without obtaining separate consent. Meta also refused access requests without a legitimate reason and left an unused account-recovery page online through which passwords were reset with forged ID documents and data on ten users was obtained. The authority imposed a penalty surcharge of 21,613,000,000 KRW and an administrative fine of 10,200,000 KRW (21,623,200,000 KRW in total) together with corrective orders.

What organisations can take from it

Advertising audiences that reflect religion, political views or sexual orientation rest on sensitive data and require separate consent.

Relevance to training and awareness

Sensitive data in advertising audiences

Authority / court
Personal Information Protection Commission (PIPC, 개인정보보호위원회)
Area of law
Data protection · Marketing and consent
Legal basis
Personal Information Protection Act (개인정보 보호법, frühere Fassung) Art. 23(1), Art. 29, Art. 35(3)
Action
Fine
Status of proceedings
unknown
Sector
Media and online platforms
Employees
10,000 or more
Published
5 Nov 2024

Original amount 21,623,200,000 KRW, converted at the ECB reference rate of 4 Nov 2024.

Checked against the official source on 4 Oct 2026 · Direct link

Report an error

Anonymous: we store only your text, no contact details and no IP address.

Ready for training that actually lands?

Try the combination for free: automated administration for you, learning formats that fit your team, with no minimum or credit card.

Start 14-day free trial