The Fair Trade Commission (FTC) has taken significant action by correcting unfair contract terms used by Champs Study, part of the Hackers Education Group, which recently came under scrutiny for practices deemed detrimental to lecturers' rights. On March 18, 2025, the FTC announced revisions to seven types of terms, comprising nine specific clauses within the 'Exam Preparation Course Academy Lecture and Remote Lecture Contract' and the 'Publication Rights, etc. Establishment Contract.'
One of the most contentious clauses stipulated automatic contract renewal, which required lecturers to express their intention to terminate their contracts three months before they expired. If they failed to do so, their contracts would renew automatically for another three years, effectively binding them to Champs Study regardless of their desire to continue. The FTC concluded such terms were unfairly detrimental to lecturers, who could find themselves shackled to long-term contracts without their consent.
Another point of contention lay with the clauses allowing Champs Study to unilaterally decide lecture schedules without consulting the lecturers. This meant instructors could be assigned to specific lectures or have their schedules altered without any discussion. The FTC deemed this practice unacceptable, asserting it infringed upon the lecturers' rights to have a say over their professional commitments and work environment.
Champs Study, previously known for its extensive educational offerings—ranging from civil service exam preparations to language acquisition—had been increasingly active, recently entering the Legal Education Eligibility Test (LEET) sector. With 2023 sales reported at 113.8 billion won, Champs Study's market presence is substantial. Nevertheless, the FTC’s investigation stemmed from reports submitted about the company’s use of terms restricting lecturer rights during their recruitment process.
According to the FTC, the originally established terms violated the 'Act on the Regulation of Terms and Conditions,' which governs fair contract practices to protect individuals against undue disadvantage. The commission highlighted the need for balance where lecturers could voice their concerns and needs without fear of repercussions.
Additional troubling clauses mandated the academy’s authority to suspend remote classes arbitrarily. This lack of stability placed lecturers’ services and reputations at risk, as abrupt changes could lead to lost trust among students. The FTC responded with corrective measures, ensuring such clauses were revised to specify under what limitations classes could be canceled.
A significant revision also involved the ownership of secondary works produced by lecturers. Under the previous agreements, Champs Study claimed broad authorship rights over any derivative works created by faculty members without requiring explicit agreement from the authors. Such stipulations unfairly deprived lecturers of their rights to profit from their creations even after contract termination. The FTC affixed the responsibility on Champs Study to amend these terms, reinforcing the fact authorship rights remain with the original creator.
The FTC officially noted, “This measure is significant as it corrects the practice of the online lecture provider Champs Study unilaterally deciding lecture schedules and restricting lecturers’ rights without consultation.” Through these corrective measures, the commission expressed hope for bolstering the lecturers’ rights, fostering competition within the online lecture market.
Notably, the FTC recognized various other unfair practices, including clauses allowing unlimited use of lecturers' personal information and vague definitions surrounding termination grounds, which could jeopardize lecturers' professional standing. By addressing these issues, the FTC aims to support fairer labor practices and encourage competitive dynamics within the educational industry.
Champs Study’s management has begun implementing required changes to align with the FTC's directives, showcasing their shift toward respecting instructors' rights and maintaining compliance with regulatory standards. This proactive approach could serve as a model for other education providers to follow, aiming to create equitable environments for educators.
Overall, the FTC’s intervention is seen as pivotal not just for the lecturers involved but also for the broader integrity of the education sector, where fair practices are fundamental to sustainable growth.
The Fair Trade Commission has articulated its commitment to continuously monitor the online lecture market, ensuring future compliance and fostering environments free from unfair terms. They hope this proactive stance will protect educators’ rights and encourage fair compensation for their contributions to education.
Looking forward, there is cautious optimism among stakeholders prominently affected by these changes, as the potential for enhanced rights may instigate a new era of fairness and opportunity within South Korea's burgeoning online education market.
