For months, the White House and members of Congress have accused the South Korean government of discriminating against the American company Coupang, echoing arguments that followed the company’s extensive lobbying campaign in Washington.
Now, however, Coupang has taken the opposite position in a U.S. courtroom.
In an effort to have a class-action lawsuit dismissed, Coupang Inc. has argued that its operating business is actually a Korean company, claiming its services are almost entirely in Korean, deliveries are limited to South Korea, and the alleged misconduct occurred there—not in the United States.
The contrast has drawn sharp criticism.
While American politicians have been pressuring South Korea on the basis that Coupang is an American company deserving U.S. protection, Coupang itself is telling a U.S. judge that it is effectively a Korean company and therefore should not have to face litigation in an American court.
Critics argue that the company is trying to enjoy the benefits of both identities: American when seeking political backing from Washington, Korean when trying to avoid legal accountability in the United States.
The contradiction is made even more striking by the fact that Coupang has continued spending heavily on lobbying in Washington. During the second quarter alone, the company paid $135,000 to lobby the Department of Commerce, the White House, and the Senate, while also paying another $250,000 to a lobbying firm with close ties to former President Donald Trump.
Plaintiffs in the lawsuit say Coupang’s argument doesn’t hold up. They point out that Coupang Inc. has publicly identified Coupang Korea as its principal subsidiary and even dispatched a U.S.-based executive to lead the Korean business on an interim basis following the company’s personal data leak.
To the plaintiffs, that makes Coupang’s courtroom claim that the Korean operation is a separate Korean company look less like a consistent legal principle and more like a convenient argument designed to avoid facing a U.S. lawsuit.