Price-gouging feud deepens at Gwangjang Market as visitor numbers fall

Visitors browse the bustling food stalls at Seoul's Gwangjang Market, Oct. 3. Korea Times photo by Yoon Han-seul

A recent feud within Seoul’s Gwangjang Market erupted into legal hostilities this week, as shop owners announced plans to file a multimillion-won lawsuit against street vendors following renewed allegations of overcharging foreign and domestic visitors.

The allegations turn what might be seen as minor consumer complaints into a significant economic and cultural dilemma for the capital city, raising questions about whether Seoul can preserve the authenticity of its most treasured landmarks amid mass tourism and global media attention.

At the center of the controversy is a viral YouTube video, uploaded earlier this month by a popular food reviewer with more than 1.5 million subscribers, which appeared to show a street vendor charging 10,000 won for a dish listed at 8,000 won. The discrepancy frustrated the creator and sparked a wave of calls for a boycott.

This is not the first time overcharging allegations have surfaced at the market, where food stalls and eateries offering hearty, affordable dishes such as noodles and bindaetteok (Korean mung bean pancakes) have attracted celebrities, including filmmaker Tim Burton.

A major controversy erupted in late 2024 when a popular travel YouTuber exposed the poor value of staple dishes, showing a $15 assorted pancake platter containing only about 10 small pieces. The resulting outrage over predatory pricing forced the Seoul city government and the merchants’ association to implement corrective measures, including a fixed quantity labeling system and the deployment of "mystery shoppers."

The Gwangjang Market Merchants’ Association, representing roughly 200 fixed-store owners, announced Monday that it plans to seek about 300 million won ($203,482) in damages from the street vendor association before the end of the year. The merchants' association said it formally notified the street vendors in mid-November but has yet to receive a response.

Shop owners claim these "minority bad actors" have scared off visitors, jeopardizing their own livelihoods.

"We’re the ones getting all the complaints. Customers don’t distinguish between licensed shops and street vendors. They just badmouth Gwangjang Market, so everyone here suffers," said one shopkeeper, whose sales have halved since the latest controversy broke.

"People now call this a 'rip-off market' and say, 'Who even goes there anymore?'" another store owner lamented. "It’s unbearable. We need some kind of compensation."

Street vendors, for their part, argue it is unfair that the actions of a few ended up representing the whole group.

"Most of us run honest businesses. The idea that all vendors should pay damages is outrageous," one vendor said. Another noted that the vendors at the heart of the scandal have been overcharging for years without facing tough penalties. "If authorities cracked down in the past, it wouldn’t have escalated this far," she said.

Market officials say confusion is inevitable given that both market sections — Gwangjang Market and Gwangjang Traditional Market — are commonly lumped together by the public, and share similar names.

This map shows the Gwangjang Market section consisting of fixed stores in blue and Gwangjang Traditional Market area in red where street food vendors are based. Courtesy of Jongno District Office

"We receive a flood of angry calls because people can’t tell the difference," an official at the main market association said. The street vendor leader fired back: "We’ll respond in due procedure if they file suit."

The latest viral YouTube video, viewed more than 16 million times, highlighted the gap between the listed price and the small portion actually served, offering viewers a striking contrast to the market’s perceived generosity and bustling charm.

The vendor defended the higher charge, saying the customer had requested extra meat, while the YouTuber insisted she had not and noted the dish contained none. Online critics claimed such “bait-and-switch” tactics were common in the area, prompting community campaigns warning tourists to steer clear of the market.

In response, local authorities hit the vendor with a 10-day suspension and said they are considering new identification rules for vendors to rebuild trust.