A court decided that a man in his 30s, who concealed that he met via a matchmaking service and subsequently married, is required to pay both the marriage success fee and a penalty three times that amount.
As reported by the legal community on the 5th, Presiding Judge Bang Chang-hyun of the Seoul Central District Court’s Civil Division 83 recently decided in favor of the plaintiff in a case brought by Jegyeolsa against Mr. Choi concerning a contractual payment dispute. The court mandated that Mr. Choi pay Jegyeolsa a total of 47,520,000 Korean won, which includes an unpaid marriage success fee of 11,880,000 Korean won and a penalty of 35,640,000 Korean won.
Mr. Choi became a member of Jegyeolsa in September 2022, paying a membership fee of 5,280,000 South Korean won, and committed to paying an extra marriage success fee of 11,880,000 South Korean won if he found a spouse through their services. The membership agreement also contained a provision that required him to pay three times the success fee if he kept his marriage secret. Jegyeolsa, the company Mr. Choi joined, is recognized as a “high-end matchmaking service” aimed at affluent individuals, people with significant assets, lawyers, doctors, and graduates from top universities.
Mr. Choi met a woman via an introduction from Jegyeolsa in January 2023 and married her in June of the same year. The problem occurred when Mr. Choi failed to notify Jegyeolsa about his marriage. Two years later, in October 2025, a complaint was submitted against Mr. Choi. Jegyeolsa then initiated legal action seeking contractual compensation. The company requested a total amount of 47,520,000 Korean won, which includes a marriage success fee of 11,880,000 Korean won and a penalty of 35,640,000 Korean won, equivalent to three times the success fee.
Mr. Choi denied the claim, explaining that he was not merely refusing to make the payment. He asserted that the company had illegally shared his personal details with a related marriage information firm, where his wife had previously been a member. Throughout this process, the company reportedly inflated his annual income to “over 90,000,000 Korean won” and his assets to “less than 1,000,000,000 Korean won.” Mr. Choi stated that because of this misleading information, he encountered disputes with the other family during the meeting, which prevented him from paying the marriage success fee.
However, the court rejected this claim. The court decided that because Mr. Choi had previously consented on the company’s website to the handling of his personal details, including interactions with representatives from related companies, the release of information was not considered unauthorized. Furthermore, the court considered the contested financial and asset data to be derived directly from what Mr. Choi provided during his membership sign-up.
The court decided that the 35,640,000 Korean won, which is three times the marriage success fee, should be considered a “penalty.” Unlike a “penalty fee,” which serves to compensate for losses when a commitment is not fulfilled, a penalty functions more like a “fine” aimed at ensuring adherence. The court mentioned, “The marriage success fee is a delayed payment for the service offered by the company. If the member does not notify them, the company faces challenges in learning about the marriage.” It further noted, “(The triple penalty) is an arrangement designed to psychologically encourage the member to inform about the marriage and settle the success fee.”
Mr. Choi also claimed that because he had already left Jegyeolsa in May 2023, a month prior to his wedding, he should not be required to pay the marriage success fee. However, the court rejected this argument as well. The court mentioned, “Jegyeolsa offers a one-year service for meetings with the opposite sex, but it usually takes a significant amount of time from the initial meeting until marriage.” It further noted, “Considering that Mr. Choi had agreed at the time of signing the contract to pay the marriage success fee even if the marriage took place after the contract period, he cannot avoid paying the fee simply because he canceled his membership.”
jasdooit 
Leave a comment