Naver “Verification system created with billions of investments … Isn’t it right to avoid free trips? “

Check-in 2020.09.06 12:00

Fake real estate verification system built by Naver
Let’s share with small and medium-sized companies to win-win
Put the provision of ‘prohibition of provision to third parties’ carjust … FTC “abuse of control”
Naver “It was a measure to avoid free trips and protect property rights”

The initiation of the case restricting the distribution of real estate sales information by the Fair Trade Commission imposed a 1 billion won penalty on Naver for abuse of market power and unfair business practices dates back some 20 years .

Naver, which first launched the real estate information service in March 2003, started the service by receiving information about the property from real estate information companies (CPs) such as Real Estate 114 and Real Estate Bank at that time and publishing it on the portal. However, fake sales combined with real sales become a social problem and Naver is in a situation where it is difficult to continue service with the existing method. There were orders from the National Assembly and government regulators to fulfill its responsibilities as a platform operator.

In response, Naver persuaded real estate agents one by one to set up a system that could only upload verified properties. Billions of billions of dollars are said to have been invested in the cost. After receiving a related patent, Naver officially launched a service in 2009 that provides information to users by receiving sales information directly from brokers without CP. Naver said: “The new system has become a differentiated competitiveness and has become a catalyst for growth,” and said: “With word of mouth providing highly reliable information, it has risen to number one in the industry”.

However, sooner or later there was a criticism that it “violates the alley business area” focused on real estate CPs, and Naver accepts this and proposes a win-win plan in 2014. It switched from the direct method through the ‘corridor → Naver ‘existing to an indirect way through the CP in the middle, such as’ corridor → CP → Naver’. Although it has reverted to the original method when the problem of the false sale occurred in terms of structure, Naver instead made sure that the CPs go through a verification system before releasing the information so that the same thing is not repeated. Verification work was commissioned to operate and manage the system that Naver previously built at the Korea Autonomous Internet Policy Organization (KISO). In addition, the prerequisite was attached that the property information verified through the verification system is used only on the Naver Real Estate and CP platform.

The problem arose in February 2015 while Kakao was trying to promote an alliance to receive verified properties from these real estate CPs. To avoid this, Naver signed a renewal contract with the CPs by putting a clause that prohibits the provision of information for sale to a third party. Something similar happened again in early 2017 with the repromotion between Kakao and Real Estate 114, but Naver blocked the partnership and the alliance was in vain. An IT industry official said: “Real estate CPs have complained about difficulties and have switched to a win-win model. Wouldn’t that be uncomfortable for Naver?” Nani asked me to take out a bunch of them. ‘

The FTC saw that it was Naver’s illegal competition restrictions that prevented real estate CPs from forming alliances with Kakao. However, Naver insisted: “In order to avoid free travel and protect intellectual property rights, a ban on supplying to third parties was included in the contract.” Naver argued that Kakao’s attempt to partner with CP was “an attempt to use it without any cost or effort.”

A Naver official said: “Before meeting with the PCs, Kakao contacted us to directly receive information on the confirmed ownership,” he said. “Therefore, he suggested building a system that connects the existing verification center only in Naver with Kakao.” There was no such thing, and since then (to avoid the burden of expenses), I tried to contact the CPs and receive information directly. “

Naver said: “Our real estate service created its own information, gave up advertising revenue and reorganized it to win-win with small and medium-sized real estate CPs.” Said.

Furthermore, the Fair Trade Commission and Naver have different interpretations of the second incident in early 2017. At that time, Naver changed the contract to prohibit the provision of third party information not only for confirmed property, but also for property requested for confirmation. When Kakao tried to take information indirectly, such as receiving a “ confirmed sale ” rather than a “ confirmed sale ” of Real Estate 114, he was blocked.

In this regard, the FTC noted that “a major problem is that the information itself was not provided in the stage prior to the completion of the verification process for confirmed merchandise.” On the other hand, Naver said: “When you trust the verification, you have to pay the cost per case, but will you pass the fake sale?” And he said: “The request itself has the character of a confirmed sale.” He said: “We have never limited ourselves to raw (unverified) information,” he said. “Why would you want the information that went through our verification center?”

Furthermore, the Fair Trade Commission determined that Naver had no proprietary rights to the confirmed proprietary information, considering that it incurred a certain cost each time the CPs entrusted the verification. However, Naver said, “a lot of money was invested in setting up the first confirmed sales service and operating and managing the verification center. Ultimately, the cost of CP is only a small fraction.” The FTC’s claim that it will belong is nonsense. “