Coupang Founder Apologizes, Blames Former Employee as Government Demands Joint Probe
Updated (2 articles)
Founder Issues Written Apology After Data Breach Kim Bom‑suk, founder and chairman, released a written apology on Dec. 28, acknowledging the leak that exposed personal data of about 34 million customers—roughly two‑thirds of South Korea’s population[1][2]. He said the apology was delayed because he wanted to verify all facts, a judgment he now calls wrong[1][2]. The statement was issued on behalf of all Coupang employees, marking his first formal apology since the incident[1][2].
Forensic Evidence Links Former Employee and Hacker Confession Coupang’s internal investigation identified a former employee as the source of the breach and recovered the hardware used in the attack[1][2]. The hacker associated with the equipment reportedly confessed to the illegal access[1][2]. Coupang presented these findings as proof of accountability, though they remain subject to external review[1][2].
Government Rejects Unilateral Findings, Calls for Joint Investigation South Korean officials labeled Coupang’s disclosures “unilateral,” emphasizing that a joint public‑private probe has not yet produced any official conclusions[1][2]. The government expects collaborative results and warns that the current revelations do not close the case[1][2]. This disagreement underscores ongoing tension over the scope and transparency of the investigation[1].
Founder and Executives Decline Parliamentary Hearing, Lawmakers Threaten Complaint Kim announced he would not attend the scheduled parliamentary hearing, citing a pre‑arranged schedule[1][2]. His brother Yoo Kim and former CEO Kang Han‑seung also submitted statements refusing to appear[1]. Lawmakers, led by Rep. Choi Min‑hee, announced plans to file a complaint against Kim for evading the hearing, intensifying political pressure for accountability[1].
Sources (2 articles)
-
[1]
Yonhap: Coupang founder apologizes for massive data breach – Highlights the founder’s delayed apology, identification of a former employee, hacker confession, and the government’s criticism of unilateral claims, plus the refusal of Kim, his brother, and former CEO to attend a parliamentary hearing, prompting lawmakers’ threat of a complaint.
-
[2]
Yonhap: Coupang founder issues first apology after massive data leak – Focuses on the written apology, the breach’s scale, the delayed communication, forensic findings linking a former employee and a confessed hacker, and the government’s call for a joint probe while noting Kim’s decision not to attend the hearing.
Timeline
Dec 28, 2025 – Coupang founder Kim Bom‑suk issues a written apology on behalf of all employees for the data breach that exposed personal information of about 34 million customers – roughly two‑thirds of South Korea’s population. He admits his earlier decision to wait for “all facts” was wrong, saying, “the apology was delayed because I wanted to confirm all facts, a judgment I now call wrong.” [1][2]
Dec 28, 2025 – Coupang’s forensic investigation pins a former employee as the source of the leak, recovers the hacking equipment, and reports that the hacker has confessed, forming the basis of the company’s unilateral findings. [1][2]
Dec 28, 2025 – The South Korean government rejects Coupang’s unilateral conclusions, emphasizing that a joint public‑private probe has not yet released any findings and that collaborative results are still expected. [1][2]
Dec 28, 2025 – Kim announces he will not attend the scheduled parliamentary hearing, citing a pre‑arranged schedule; his brother Yoo Kim (head of global operational excellence) and former CEO Kang Han‑seung file similar non‑appearance statements. “Kim again sent a statement indicating he would not appear at the parliamentary hearing due to a prearranged schedule.” [1]
Dec 28, 2025 – Lawmakers, led by Rep. Choi Min‑hee, threaten to file a formal complaint against Kim for skipping the hearing, heightening political pressure for accountability. “Lawmakers had previously said they would file a complaint against Kim for not attending the hearings.” [1]