Who was sanctioned, and for what?

In its own online shop for Galaxy S25 pre-orders, KT Corporation stated that benefits would apply unless the end of the promotion was shown, but then limited them to the first 1,000 orders and unilaterally cancelled 7,127 pre-orders that had come in via a YouTube channel and Genie TV and had already been fully completed. The authority regarded this as false information on key terms and an unjustified refusal to conclude contracts under the Telecommunications Business Act (전기통신사업법), imposed a fine of 640,000,000 KRW and ordered KT to show additional pre-order benefits clearly in future.

Authority / court

Korea Media and Communications Commission (KMCC, 방송미디어통신위원회)

Area of law

Consumer protection and online retail · Misleading advertising and pricing

Legal basis

Telecommunications Business Act (전기통신사업법) Art. 50(1) Nr. 5 und Nr. 5-2

Action

Fine

Status of proceedings

unknown

Sector

Telecoms, IT and software

Published

8 May 2026

Original amount 640,000,000 KRW, converted at the ECB reference rate of 8 May 2026.

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

From February 2020 to May 2024, Excom Global advertised its rental of mobile Wi-Fi routers for travel abroad ('Imoto no WiFi') in travel-guide adverts and on its own websites as number one for customer satisfaction, for being chosen by overseas travellers and for customer service. The commissioned survey, without checking actual use, merely asked for impressions of the websites of the company and nine arbitrarily selected competitors and was also not reproduced accurately; a surcharge of 172,620,000 JPY was imposed.

Authority / court

Consumer Affairs Agency (消費者庁, CAA)

Area of law

Consumer protection and online retail · Misleading advertising and pricing

Legal basis

Art. 8 Abs. 1 i. V. m. Art. 5 Nr. 1 Act against Unjustifiable Premiums and Misleading Representations (不当景品類及び不当表示防止法, Gesetz Nr. 134/1962)

Action

Fine

Status of proceedings

unknown

Sector

Telecoms, IT and software

Culpability

negligent

Published

12 Mar 2026

Original amount 172,620,000 JPY, converted at the ECB reference rate of 12 Mar 2026.

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

With effect from 4 April 2022, Orange Polska unilaterally introduced a fee for keeping the phone number active in existing prepaid contracts, although neither the law nor the contract allowed this change, and it failed to disclose the fee on starter packs and on its website. UOKiK classed both as unfair practices and imposed fines of PLN 17,325,000 and PLN 7,425,000, totalling PLN 24,750,000. The decision is not final.

Authority / court

Prezes Urzędu Ochrony Konkurencji i Konsumentów (UOKiK)

Area of law

Consumer protection and online retail · Misleading advertising and pricing

Legal basis

Art. 24 Abs. 2 Nr. 3 und Art. 27 ustawa o ochronie konkurencji i konsumentów i. V. m. Art. 4 und Art. 6 ustawa o przeciwdziałaniu nieuczciwym praktykom rynkowym

Action

Fine

Status of proceedings

under appeal

Sector

Telecoms, IT and software

Original amount 24,750,000 PLN, converted at the ECB reference rate of 30 Jan 2026.

Checked against the official source on 28 Sep 2026 · Direct link

The telecoms provider pleaded guilty to using a prohibited clause allowing unilateral amendment of contracts without the specific conditions required by law, and to omitting mandatory information from distance contracts for successive services, such as a detailed description of the services, the price and description of devices offered as a premium, usage restrictions and geographical limits. Fines totalling CAD 210,700 including costs were imposed on 50 counts; the offences dated from 2012 and 2013.

Authority / court

Gericht in Montréal (Ermittlung: Office de la protection du consommateur (OPC); Anklage: Directeur des poursuites criminelles et pénales (DPCP))

Area of law

Consumer protection and online retail · Information duties in online retail

Legal basis

Loi sur la protection du consommateur (RLRQ c. P-40.1), Art. 11.2 und 214.2

Action

Fine

Status of proceedings

final

Sector

Telecoms, IT and software

Published

6 Feb 2026

Original amount 210,700 CAD, converted at the ECB reference rate of 15 Dec 2025.

Checked against the official source on 3 Oct 2026 · Direct link

According to the FTC complaint, the education provider hid the cancellation option for its automatically renewing subscriptions on its website and, since October 2020, continued to charge almost 200,000 customers even after they had cancelled. Under the settlement, Chegg is paying 7.5 million USD for refunds and must offer simple cancellation.

Authority / court

Federal Trade Commission (FTC)

Area of law

Consumer protection and online retail · Information duties in online retail

Legal basis

Restore Online Shoppers' Confidence Act (ROSCA); Section 5 FTC Act

Action

Disgorgement of profits

Status of proceedings

final

Sector

Telecoms, IT and software

Repeat case

yes

Published

15 Sep 2025

Original amount 7,500,000 USD, converted at the ECB reference rate of 18 Sep 2025.

Checked against the official source on 25 Sep 2026 · Direct link

According to the complaint of the Federal Trade Commission (FTC, the US consumer protection authority), the AI writing service offered a “Testimonial & Review” feature that generated detailed customer reviews with entirely invented details from brief, generic input; individual users produced hundreds to tens of thousands of reviews with it. With the final settlement order (3–2 vote), the FTC prohibited Rytr from offering any service for generating reviews. On 22 December 2025, the FTC set the order aside again with Rytr’s consent (2–0 vote): the facts alleged in the complaint did not support a violation of Section 5 of the FTC Act, and the order unduly burdened AI innovation, contrary to the Trump Administration’s AI Executive Order and AI Action Plan.

Authority / court

Federal Trade Commission (FTC)

Area of law

Consumer protection and online retail · Fake reviews

Legal basis

Section 5 FTC Act (Mittel zur Täuschung bereitgestellt)

Action

Order

Status of proceedings

overturned

Sector

Telecoms, IT and software

Published

18 Dec 2024

Checked against the official source on 28 Sep 2026 · Version 2 · Direct link

According to the CFPB, Apple in some cases failed to forward Apple Card users' disputes to the issuing bank Goldman Sachs and designed advertising and the checkout process so that customers wrongly assumed device purchases would automatically be split into interest-free instalments (Apple Card Monthly Installments). The order imposed a fine of 25 million USD; in September 2025 the CFPB terminated it early after the fine had been paid. The authority allegedly made the findings set out here; this account is not based on a final judgment.

Authority / court

Consumer Financial Protection Bureau (CFPB)

Area of law

Consumer protection and online retail · Misleading advertising and pricing

Legal basis

Consumer Financial Protection Act of 2010, §§ 1031, 1036 (12 U.S.C. §§ 5531, 5536) – unlautere, irreführende und missbräuchliche Praktiken

Action

Fine

Status of proceedings

final

Sector

Telecoms, IT and software

Employees

10,000 or more

Published

23 Oct 2024

Original amount 25,000,000 USD, converted at the ECB reference rate of 23 Oct 2024.

Checked against the official source on 3 Oct 2026 · Direct link

In its own online shop, the manufacturer set a 'WEB price', at which the devices had never been sold there, against a reduced 'campaign price' for seven notebook models, and announced deadlines after which the discounts still applied (example from October 2022: 187,880 JPY reduced to 148,425 JPY, 21% off). A surcharge of 42,230,000 JPY was imposed for this.

Authority / court

Consumer Affairs Agency (消費者庁, CAA)

Area of law

Consumer protection and online retail · Misleading advertising and pricing

Legal basis

Art. 8 Abs. 1 i. V. m. Art. 5 Nr. 2 Act against Unjustifiable Premiums and Misleading Representations (不当景品類及び不当表示防止法, Gesetz Nr. 134/1962)

Action

Fine

Status of proceedings

unknown

Sector

Telecoms, IT and software

Culpability

negligent

Published

2 Aug 2024

Original amount 42,230,000 JPY, converted at the ECB reference rate of 2 Aug 2024.

Checked against the official source on 8 Oct 2026 · Company name anonymised since 2 Aug 2026 · Direct link

The Secretaria Nacional do Consumidor (Senacon, National Consumer Secretariat) fined a mobile operator 2,000,000 BRL for misleading 5G advertising. According to the decision, the advertising messages did not disclose the limitations of the DSS technology used clearly and adequately and thereby misled consumers. Separate fining decisions were issued against three other telecommunications operators for the same advertising practice.

Authority / court

Secretaria Nacional do Consumidor (Senacon), Departamento de Proteção e Defesa do Consumidor (DPDC)

Area of law

Consumer protection and online retail · Misleading advertising and pricing

Legal basis

Art. 6 III und IV, Art. 30, Art. 31 und Art. 37 § 1 Código de Defesa do Consumidor (Lei nº 8.078/1990); Art. 13 I und VI und Art. 14 Decreto nº 2.181/1997

Action

Fine

Status of proceedings

unknown

Sector

Telecoms, IT and software

Published

23 Jul 2024

Original amount 2,000,000 BRL, converted at the ECB reference rate of 23 Jul 2024.

Checked against the official source on 7 Oct 2026 · Company name anonymised since 23 Jul 2026 · Direct link

The consumer protection department of Senacon fined a mobile operator 922,869.00 BRL because its advertising for "5G" misled consumers: it did not clearly and adequately point out the limitations of the DSS technology used. The Senacon Secretary rejected the appeal in December 2024.

Authority / court

Secretaria Nacional do Consumidor (Senacon), Departamento de Proteção e Defesa do Consumidor (DPDC)

Area of law

Consumer protection and online retail · Misleading advertising and pricing

Legal basis

Art. 6 III, IV, 30, 31, 37 § 1 Lei nº 8.078/1990 (Código de Defesa do Consumidor); Art. 13 I, VI und 14 Decreto nº 2.181/1997

Action

Fine

Status of proceedings

final

Sector

Telecoms, IT and software

Published

20 May 2024

Original amount 922,869 BRL, converted at the ECB reference rate of 20 May 2024.

Checked against the official source on 7 Oct 2026 · Company name anonymised since 20 May 2026 · Direct link

The KFTC (Korea Fair Trade Commission, Korea's competition and consumer authority) found that the games company had changed the probabilities of paid random items (loot boxes) in two of its online games to the players' disadvantage and had failed to disclose this or disclosed it falsely. It treated this as deceiving consumers under the E-Commerce Act and, in addition to a cease-and-desist order, provisionally set fines totalling KRW 11,642 million (KRW 11,593 million for one game, KRW 49 million for the other), according to the KFTC the highest amount under that Act at the time.

Authority / court

Korea Fair Trade Commission (KFTC)

Area of law

Consumer protection and online retail · Misleading advertising and pricing

Legal basis

Art. 21 Abs. 1 Nr. 1 Act on the Consumer Protection in Electronic Commerce (E-Commerce-Gesetz)

Action

Fine

Status of proceedings

unknown

Sector

Telecoms, IT and software

Repeat case

yes

Published

3 Jan 2024

Original amount 11,642,000,000 KRW, converted at the ECB reference rate of 3 Jan 2024.

Checked against the official source on 8 Oct 2026 · Company name anonymised since 3 Jan 2026 · Direct link

The company charged 50% of the fees for the remaining term when an annual plan paid monthly was cancelled after 14 days, and did not refund annual fees paid in advance; the notices about this could only be reached via an information icon during checkout. The authority regarded this as a restriction of the right to cancel and a breach of the duty to explain key contract terms clearly, imposed fines of 876,000,000 KRW and 433,000,000 KRW (1,309,000,000 KRW in total) under the Telecommunications Business Act (전기통신사업법) and ordered the company to display the consequences of cancellation clearly and to improve its penalty and refund rules.

Authority / court

Korea Communications Commission (KCC, 방송통신위원회; seit Oktober 2025 Korea Media and Communications Commission, 방송미디어통신위원회)

Area of law

Consumer protection and online retail · Information duties in online retail

Legal basis

Telecommunications Business Act (전기통신사업법) Art. 50(1) Nr. 5 und Nr. 5-2, Art. 52, Art. 53

Action

Fine

Status of proceedings

unknown

Sector

Telecoms, IT and software

Published

29 Nov 2023

Original amount 1,309,000,000 KRW, converted at the ECB reference rate of 29 Nov 2023.

Checked against the official source on 8 Oct 2026 · Company name anonymised since 29 Nov 2025 · Direct link

On 13 October 2023, on application by the National Consumer Commission (NCC, South Africa's consumer protection authority), the National Consumer Tribunal (NCT, the consumer protection adjudicator) found, in proceedings confined to eleven consumer complaints, that a mobile operator had breached the Consumer Protection Act, including by charging unreasonable fees for early cancellation of fixed-term contracts, by requiring all outstanding amounts and the fee to be paid before a cancellation took effect, by implementing cancellations late and by failing to notify a customer that a contract was about to end; a data package that was not available had also been advertised and sold. The Tribunal regarded part of the conduct – such as continuing to bill after cancellation, together with the use of debt collectors and listings with credit bureaus – as unconscionable under section 40 and imposed an administrative fine of 1,000,000 ZAR.

Authority / court

National Consumer Tribunal (auf Antrag der National Consumer Commission)

Area of law

Consumer protection and online retail

Legal basis

Consumer Protection Act 68 of 2008: Section 14(3)(b)(i) i. V. m. Regulation 5(2) und (3), Section 14(2)(b)(i)(bb), Section 14(2)(b) und (3), Section 14(2)(c), Section 40(1)(b) und (d), Section 41(3) (in den Gründen i. V. m. Section 29(b)); Verwaltungsstrafe nach Section 112

Action

Fine

Status of proceedings

unknown

Sector

Telecoms, IT and software

Repeat case

no

Mitigating circumstances

Credits to affected consumers, dropping cancellation fees for SIM-only contracts and cooperation with the National Consumer Commission and the Tribunal.

Original amount 1,000,000 ZAR, converted at the ECB reference rate of 13 Oct 2023.

Checked against the official source on 8 Oct 2026 · Company name anonymised since 13 Oct 2025 · Direct link

The Departamento de Proteção e Defesa do Consumidor (DPDC, consumer protection department) of the Secretaria Nacional do Consumidor (Senacon, National Consumer Secretariat) fined the Brazilian subsidiary of the technology group 12,274,500 BRL because the group’s smartphones from a certain model generation onwards were sold without a charger. The authority regarded this, among other things, as unlawful tying, the sale of an incomplete product and discrimination against consumers, rejected environmental protection as a justification and additionally ordered the cancellation of the registration of these models and the immediate halt of sales of the smartphones without a charger. Senacon later stayed the proceedings in order to negotiate a conduct agreement (Termo de Ajustamento de Conduta) with the company.

Authority / court

Secretaria Nacional do Consumidor (Senacon), Departamento de Proteção e Defesa do Consumidor (DPDC)

Area of law

Consumer protection and online retail

Legal basis

Art. 12 I und IX, Art. 13 XXIII und Art. 22 III Decreto nº 2.181/1997; Art. 57 Código de Defesa do Consumidor (Lei nº 8.078/1990); Art. 18 IV und VI Decreto nº 2.181/1997

Action

Fine

Status of proceedings

unknown

Sector

Telecoms, IT and software

Employees

10,000 or more

Published

6 Sep 2022

Original amount 12,274,500 BRL, converted at the ECB reference rate of 6 Sep 2022.

Checked against the official source on 7 Oct 2026 · Company name anonymised since 6 Sep 2024 · Direct link