As the debate continues over the consent process for receiving KakaoTalk brand messages and the use of personal data, calls are growing for a thorough examination of personal data handling practices across the corporate advertising text and messaging market.
Reports of spam related to KakaoTalk brand messages account for only 0.3% of the total, suggesting that spam issues are more prevalent on other platforms. This raises the need for a detailed investigation into the entire advertising messaging market to ensure there are no illegal activities.
According to industry sources, the Personal Information Protection Commission is currently conducting on-site investigations related to KakaoTalk brand messages. The issue of consent for receiving advertising messages was also raised during a National Assembly audit by the Political Affairs Committee on October 13.
The main point of contention is whether companies have obtained consent for receiving marketing messages. Many businesses utilize KakaoTalk's corporate messaging service, which is cheaper than traditional SMS, without obtaining separate consent after users have agreed to receive text advertisements. Users often mistakenly believe that agreeing to receive SMS also covers KakaoTalk brand messages.
Telecommunications companies argue that consent for SMS or MMS advertising must be distinguished from consent for KakaoTalk corporate messages. They assert that even if consumers consent to receive SMS advertisements, it does not imply consent for KakaoTalk brand messages. KakaoTalk also differentiates between SMS and corporate messages in its terms, indicating that separate consent is required for sending brand messages for advertising purposes.
KakaoTalk brand messages are advantageous because they allow easy verification of the sender and enhance accessibility for small businesses. Research by professors Ryu Han-byul and Kim Ji-hwan from Hanyang University found that small businesses using brand messages saw a 90.2% increase in sales compared to before sending.
Some observers have likened the current controversy to past conflicts between KakaoTalk and the telecommunications industry during the launch of its voice call feature in 2012, when telecom companies expressed concerns over potential revenue losses from voice calls. However, this issue requires a distinction between business interests and the legality of consent for receiving advertisements and handling personal data.
In light of this, the Civic Group for Economic Justice has recently called for a comprehensive investigation into personal data handling practices across the corporate advertising text and messaging market. They emphasize the need to examine how advertisers, platforms, and sending businesses collect and use phone numbers, whether they properly verify consent for receiving advertisements, and if they continue to use personal data after a refusal to receive messages.
According to data presented by Representative Choi Eun-seok of the People Power Party during the audit, spam reports related to KakaoTalk brand messages totaled 132,116 from June of last year to July of this year. This represents about 0.3% of the total spam reported by the Korea Internet & Security Agency (KISA). KISA reported that the number of spam reports and detections reached 31.93 million in the first half of 2025 and 12.88 million in the second half.
While the number of spam reports does not directly indicate the scale of illegal advertising or violations of personal data protection laws, the increasing harm caused by spam highlights the need to examine the entire advertising messaging service.
Kim Hyun-sik, head of the Policy Division at the Korea Consumer Agency, stated, “Investigations should be conducted not only on Kakao but also on the advertising messages from telecommunications companies. We need to examine whether SK Telecom, KT, and LG Uplus have used personal data for advertising beyond the scope of consumer consent during their corporate messaging processes, which could constitute violations of personal data protection laws.”
* This article has been translated by AI.
Copyright ⓒ Aju Press All rights reserved.