A Government Witch Hunt Against Coupang?

South Korea’s standing special prosecutor investigating Coupang has launched a sweeping raid on the Ministry of Employment and Labor and the Seoul Regional Labor Office, escalating what critics increasingly describe as a politically charged campaign targeting the e-commerce giant.

On the morning of January 27, the special prosecutor team led by Ahn Kwon-seop began executing search and seizure warrants at multiple government locations, including the Ministry of Employment and Labor’s Labor Standards Policy Division and Retirement Pension Welfare Division at the Sejong Government Complex, as well as office space within the Seoul Regional Labor Office’s Smart Work Center. Mobile phones belonging to ministry officials were also confiscated.

The investigation centers on allegations that Coupang, through its logistics subsidiary Coupang Fulfillment Services (CFS), deliberately revised its employment rules in ways unfavorable to day laborers, thereby avoiding the payment of legally mandated severance pay.

According to the special prosecutor, the raids are intended not only to verify the severance pay allegations but also to examine broader suspicions related to Coupang’s government-facing lobbying and external affairs activities. In other words, the probe has expanded beyond labor practices into the company’s interactions with state institutions themselves.

This development has sparked growing controversy. Supporters of the investigation argue that no corporation—no matter how large—should be beyond scrutiny, particularly when workers’ rights are at stake. Critics, however, see something more troubling: an aggressive use of prosecutorial power that now extends into government ministries, blurring the line between legitimate oversight and political pressure.

With raids on the Ministry of Employment and Labor and the Seoul Regional Labor Office, the case has taken on a distinctly institutional dimension. It raises uncomfortable questions about whether the current administration is merely enforcing labor law—or actively “going after” Coupang as a symbolic target in a broader political or ideological battle.

As the investigation widens, the stakes are no longer limited to one company’s alleged misconduct. They now touch on the balance between corporate accountability, prosecutorial restraint, and the risk of state power being perceived as selective or punitive. Whether this is a necessary reckoning or a government-driven witch hunt is a question that will only grow louder in the days ahead.