Top Headlines

Feeds

Coupang Data Breach Forces Leadership Change, Triggers Parliamentary Scrutiny and Legal Action

Updated (3 articles)

Massive breach compromises personal data of over 33 million users Coupang disclosed that personal information—including names, phone numbers, emails and delivery addresses – of approximately 33.7 million customers was exposed through overseas servers beginning June 24, with the company becoming aware in November 2025. Payment‑card details and login credentials were not affected, and the breach scale was revised upward from the initial 4,500 accounts reported. The incident represents one of the largest data exposures in South Korea’s e‑commerce sector [3].

Executive turnover aims to restore confidence On Dec 10, 2025, CEO Park Dae‑jun resigned, accepting full responsibility for the leak and apologizing to the public. Harold Rogers, previously chief administrative officer and general counsel of Coupang Inc., was named interim CEO of the South Korean unit to steer the response and communication effort. Rogers’ appointment signals direct involvement of the U.S. parent company in managing the fallout [3][1][2].

Parliamentary hearing showcases corporate accountability Rogers appeared before the National Assembly’s science, ICT, broadcasting and communications committee on Dec 16‑17, 2025, offering a formal apology and pledging cooperation with regulators and customers. Founder Kim Bom‑suk was absent, citing global business duties. Rogers outlined a pending compensation package to be deployed after the investigation and explained the SEC filing intended to reduce information asymmetry for U.S. investors, noting no legal requirement to report the breach to the SEC [1][2].

Regulators and courts intensify pressure on Coupang South Korea’s presidential office has requested detailed compensation plans, while police conducted a second‑day raid on Coupang’s Seoul headquarters as the probe continues. The company also faces a U.S. class‑action lawsuit related to the breach, adding international legal exposure to domestic scrutiny. These actions underscore the heightened regulatory and legal environment confronting the firm [3].

Sources (3 articles)