From Technology Theft Allegations to Network Controversies... KT and t'order Conflict Spreads to Stores

KT and the table-order startup t'order, which once pursued business together, have been continuing their conflict for more than three years. The start of the conflict stemmed from allegations of technology theft. Since then, the controversy has expanded to various issues, including internet connection failures, sales methods, and information exchanged during the merger and acquisition (M&A) process. Recently, as t'order directly informs users of issues related to KT using ordering tablets for restaurants, the conflict between the two companies is spreading into the service areas used by store owners and consumers.

The claims of both sides diverge significantly. t'order claims that KT utilized its business information, which was accessed during the collaboration and M&A process, for its competing service, 'HiOrder'. On the other hand, KT maintains that it developed HiOrder independently and has never used t'order's technology or customer information.

According to t'order, discussions for business cooperation between the two companies began in 2022. t'order claims that during meetings involving KT's strategic investment team and others, they shared business plans, sales strategies, and technical structures. In February 2023, they also formalized cooperation to link KT's artificial intelligence (AI) service robots with t'order's tablet menus.

The conflict with KT intensified after KT launched its own table-order service, HiOrder, in May of the same year. t'order suspects that the business models and service operation methods shared during the previous cooperation process were reflected in HiOrder. However, KT has consistently denied the allegations of technology theft, stating that HiOrder is a service developed independently. Regarding this, a previous criminal complaint filed by t'order resulted in a decision by the police not to transfer the case for prosecution.

The two companies met again at the end of 2024 despite the conflict. Subsequently, M&A discussions for the acquisition of t'order proceeded from January 2025. t'order claims that during this process, it answered more than 1,000 due diligence questions at the request of KT. Due diligence questions are inquiries exchanged during the process of reviewing a corporate acquisition to verify the target company's business, financial status, technology, etc.

The M&A discussions concluded in July of the same year. Afterward, both sides presented opposing positions regarding the scope of information shared during the due diligence process. While t'order claimed that it provided key internal information such as technical structure, sales information, and business plans for the acquisition review, KT countered that it did not have direct access to sensitive information.

A KT official stated, "The M&A review was centered around external advisory firms, and it was conducted in a way that prevented direct information access by KT and shared only limited information," adding, "There was no instance of requesting or receiving sales know-how."

The official continued, "Information such as customer data could only be verified by the advisory firms, and KT has neither viewed nor received it."

The conflict between the two companies extended beyond technology and M&A issues to internet services. t'order claims that in April 2023, connection failures and missing orders occurred in some restaurants using KT internet for their ordering tablets.

According to t'order's explanation, the number of devices that could be connected to one internet line was limited to about 14 at the time. Since table orders involve installing dozens of tablets depending on the size of the store, if the number of connectable devices is limited, some terminals may not function properly.

t'order stated that more than 240 related inquiries were received over the following three months. They claimed that some stores were guided to switch to corporate internet lines, which have higher fees than before.

The issue, according to t'order, is that HiOrder sales were conducted during the fault response process. t'order stated that it confirmed cases where HiOrder sales representatives visited some stores that had submitted internet failure inquiries to suggest product replacement.

t'order also claims that stores that adopted HiOrder were applied different conditions, such as not having limits on connectable devices without a separate line change or installing dedicated Wi-Fi.

KT is denying the allegations that it applied discriminatory conditions to target a specific table-order company or to induce subscription to its own service. The company maintains that there were no headquarters instructions to increase the number of connectable devices on the condition of subscribing to HiOrder or to apply unfavorable standards to stores using t'order.

Ultimately, the core of this matter is how the internet service and HiOrder sales were actually connected in the field. KT's explanation—that these were measures based on general internet usage standards and separate sales activities—clashes with t'order's claim that problems occurring in telecommunications services were utilized for the sales of a competing product.

In the process of announcing this conflict, t'order utilized the customer touchpoints it has secured. Recently, titles of articles related to KT have been exposed on the 'Real-Time Keywords LIVE' feature of t'order's ordering tablets. t'order stated that it displayed the relevant content on the tablets based on its own judgment.

A t'order official said, "The store owners and customers using our service are those directly within the sphere of influence of this issue," and added, "We judged it to be right to announce what happened at our service sites through our channels."

t'order explained that the purpose is not merely to announce a corporate dispute with KT. They utilized various channels, including the tablets, to bring to public attention the issue of how to protect technology and business information during the process of collaboration between large corporations and startups. t'order stated that it is operating relevant content within a range that does not interfere with the ordering experience and is also reflecting the opinions of store owners.

However, a company claiming damages and announcing its position is a separate matter from using the screen that consumers use to order food as a means of conveying a dispute between companies. While t'order explains that store owners and consumers are also parties affected by this matter, the extent to which an ordering platform can be used to communicate a company's position is something that needs to be examined.

As the conflict between the two companies drags on, the corporate dispute spreads to the actual sites where services are used. If problems occur with internet access, store owners directly experience missing orders and disruptions in store operations, and if corporate disputes are exposed on ordering tablets, consumers also encounter unwanted content during the ordering process.

Ultimately, this conflict does not end with determining whether technology theft occurred. It remains an issue to consider to what extent KT, which provides the communication network, and t'order, which operates the ordering platform, can utilize the infrastructure and customer touchpoints they have secured during the competitive process.