(Photo= Yonhap news)

[Alpha Biz= Reporter Kim Sangjin] The plagiarism controversy raised by KakaoPay Insurance against Samsung Fire & Marine Insurance may escalate into a legal battle. While Samsung Fire & Marine Insurance has not officially responded to the allegations, it is internally preparing for potential legal issues.

On the 2nd, the insurance industry reported that KakaoPay Insurance sent a warning letter to Samsung Fire & Marine Insurance CEO, Lee Mun-hwa, expressing deep regret over the situation. The letter stated, "The mobile enrollment process screen for Samsung Fire & Marine Insurance's newly revamped overseas travel insurance product is 100% identical to ours," and accused Samsung of infringing on legal rights and violating fair competition and business ethics in the insurance industry.

KakaoPay Insurance demanded that Samsung Fire & Marine Insurance immediately revert the copied process, offer a formal apology from the responsible party, and present measures to prevent recurrence.

Samsung Fire & Marine Insurance has not issued an official response but maintains that it periodically updates its enrollment process based on customer surveys, thus denying any plagiarism. The company also indicated that it would not revert the process or issue an apology.

However, it is reported that Samsung is conducting internal and external legal reviews due to the allegations. KakaoPay Insurance claims that a review by a patent law firm found significant similarities, dependence, and originality in the mobile process, indicating a high likelihood of copyright infringement and potential violation of the Unfair Competition Prevention Act by Samsung's use of the current enrollment screen to sell insurance products.

KakaoPay Insurance plans to monitor Samsung Fire & Marine Insurance's future actions and responses before deciding on legal action. They are concerned that a single warning may not prevent similar incidents from happening again.

The fintech industry has mixed reactions to this controversy, acknowledging that processes can be similar but expressing surprise that even the wording was identical. Although both companies are in the insurance business, there is a perceived difference in the seriousness of the issue.

 

 

[ⓒ AlphaBIZ. 무단전재-재배포 금지]