[Business Contracts: Is Signing Enough? ①] Website Development Contracts in Korea: Must You Pay the Balance Without Administrator Access?
![[Business Contracts: Is Signing Enough? ①] Website Development Contracts in Korea: Must You Pay the Balance Without Administrator Access? cover](https://24twwbxsszxyfawd.public.blob.vercel-storage.com/blog/web_en_card_01_cover-rt7TtdCqvgElcTPpOsc4Z0LyfAWypu.png)
Hello, I'm Ji Sang-jin, a Korean administrative scrivener (행정사).
Running a business involves signing numerous contracts.
You hire a developer to build your website, outsource customer data processing, store products in a warehouse, and purchase advertising through online platforms. Even renting a kiosk for your store requires a contract.
Everything may appear straightforward at the beginning.
The price is agreed upon, the contract period is confirmed, and both parties sign.
Problems often emerge only after the work begins.
A website is declared complete, but you cannot modify it yourself. The inventory recorded by a warehouse does not match the actual stock. Advertising fees continue to be deducted after a campaign ends. When you close your store, you discover unexpected kiosk termination charges.
You reopen the contract.
But the provision you need may be missing, or the agreement may contain no clear standard for determining whether the other party has fulfilled its obligations.
Signing a contract does not automatically protect your business throughout the entire transaction.
The parties need to define what has been promised, establish how performance will be verified, and preserve evidence showing any discrepancy between the agreement and what actually occurred.
In this five-part series, Business Contracts: Is Signing Enough?, we examine common contractual problems businesses may encounter.
We will look at what should be documented before signing and what records should be reviewed when a problem has already arisen.
Business Contracts: Is Signing Enough? — Series Overview
① Website Development Contracts — Administrator Access and Final Payment ← This Article
② Personal Data Processing Outsourcing Agreements — Entrusting Customer Data to External Service Providers
③ Warehouse Inventory Verification — When Recorded and Actual Stock Quantities Do Not Match
④ Platform Advertising Fees — When Charges Continue After Advertising Ends
⑤ Kiosk Rental Agreements — Early Termination Charges When Closing a Business
The Website Is Finished, but You Cannot Obtain Administrator Access
Your website developer contacts you.
The website is complete. Please make the final payment.
You visit the website. The pages load properly, and the design looks satisfactory.
But when you ask for an administrator account to add products, the developer gives an unexpected response.
We manage the administrator account. If you need to add products or change prices, please send us a request.
You commissioned an online store that you intended to operate yourself. Yet even a simple price change now requires the developer's assistance.
Suppose the total development fee is KRW 5 million. You have already paid KRW 3 million, leaving KRW 2 million outstanding.
Must you pay the remaining balance if you have not received administrator access?
Start by reviewing the development contract and quotation to determine which functions and operational permissions the developer agreed to provide.
If the agreement requires the developer to supply functions that allow you to add products and modify prices independently, the relevant question is whether those functions and permissions have actually been delivered.
Conversely, paying for website development does not automatically entitle you to permissions that were never agreed upon.
The problem becomes particularly apparent when the contract contains only this provision:
The final payment shall be made upon completion of the website.
The developer may consider publication of the website sufficient for completion.
The business owner may believe the project is incomplete until the website can be operated independently.
A website development contract should establish not only when the project must be completed, but also what must be delivered for the project to qualify as complete.
This article explains how to connect the promises in a quotation to the contract, delivery and acceptance requirements, and final payment conditions.
It also examines what business owners should review when a developer has already requested the outstanding balance.
1. What If the Quotation Promises Administrator Access, but the Contract Only Says "Website Development"?
Consider the following hypothetical situation.
Business owner A receives a quotation from developer B.
The quotation includes:
- Product registration functionality
- Product price editing functionality
- Mobile-responsive pages
- Provision of an administrator account
However, the signed contract states only:
The developer shall build and deliver the online store by October 31.
The payment clause is equally brief:
The client shall pay the remaining KRW 2 million upon completion of the website.
The quotation specifies individual functions, but the contract refers only to the general task of developing an online store.
It does not clearly define which permissions the administrator account must provide or what constitutes completion.
Actual Mediation Case: A KRW 22 Million Dispute Over Website Development Scope
A real dispute illustrates the consequences of failing to define the development scope clearly.
Case No. 2017-02392 appears in the 2018 Content Dispute Mediation Casebook published by the Korea Creative Content Agency.
A company selling made-to-order products commissioned a website development project worth approximately KRW 60 million.
It paid KRW 38 million but withheld the remaining KRW 22 million, arguing that the warehouse management system (WMS) had not been properly developed.
The client maintained that the WMS was naturally included in the original project scope.
The developer argued that the system constituted additional development work not included in the quotation or contract.
The disagreement escalated, and the developer filed a lawsuit seeking KRW 75 million, including the outstanding balance and additional development fees.
During mediation, the parties reached a settlement under which the developer agreed to deliver the existing work in a modifiable form and the client agreed to pay KRW 5 million.
The dispute was not simply about whether the website had been completed. It concerned whether the WMS formed part of the original contract and how the existing development work should be handed over after the project broke down.
This is why product management functions and administrator permissions should not be left as features assumed to be included in a website development contract.
They should be expressly defined in the statement of work.
Source: Korea Creative Content Agency, 2018 Content Dispute Mediation Casebook, Case No. 2017-02392.
Incorporate the Quotation into the Statement of Work
If the contract has already been signed, examine whether the quotation forms part of the agreement, what the parties agreed upon, and whether additional terms were discussed during development.
If the agreement has not yet been signed, the priority is to eliminate these uncertainties from the documents.
For example, the scope-of-work provision can be revised as follows.
Before
The developer shall develop an online store.
After — Illustrative Clause
The screens, functions, and operational materials to be developed and delivered by the developer shall be specified in the attached Statement of Work, which shall form an integral part of this Agreement.
Adding this sentence alone is not sufficient.
The attached Statement of Work must also specify the product registration and price editing functions and the scope of administrator permissions in accordance with the parties' actual agreement.
The objective is to convert the promises made in the quotation into clearly defined contractual deliverables.
Both parties can then perform the contract against the same agreed requirements.
2. Why "Provision of an Administrator Account" May Still Be Insufficient
Suppose the Statement of Work requires the developer to provide an administrator account.
The developer delivers a username and password as promised.
However, when A logs in, the account permits only content editing. Product prices cannot be changed.
The important issue is not the name of the account.
It is whether the account provides the permissions needed to use the functions promised under the contract.
If A and the developer agreed that A would manage products independently, the delivery obligation could be specified as follows.
Upon delivery, the developer shall provide the client with an administrator account that enables the client to register products, edit product information, and change product prices independently.
The allocation of permissions should reflect the agreed responsibilities of each party.
If the business owner will operate some functions while the developer continues to manage others, those responsibilities should be distinguished in the contract.
The same principle applies to domain names and hosting.
The parties should agree on whose name the domain will be registered under, who will contract for and pay for hosting, and which accounts and operational materials must be transferred when the development relationship ends.
Where an external e-commerce platform or website builder is used, the available permissions should be checked against the platform's actual capabilities.
Paying a website development fee does not automatically transfer ownership of all source code or the contractual position associated with a third-party service.
Rather than demanding every possible permission, the business owner should identify the access required for their operations and document what the developer has agreed to provide.
If another service provider may take over maintenance later, the parties should also define which materials and accounts the business owner will be able to use after the original contract ends.
3. Acceptance Criteria Should Specify Actual Test Results, Not Merely "Normal Operation"
Once the development scope and administrator permissions have been defined, the next step is to establish how performance will be verified.
Consider this contractual provision.
Before
The client shall inspect the website to determine whether it operates normally.
The problem is that the provision does not identify what must be checked to establish normal operation.
Actual Mediation Case: A Website Design Payment Dispute Involving Acceptance Records
Another case in the same casebook shows why acceptance procedures and records can become important in a contractual dispute.
In Case No. 2017-04949, a website design engagement worth approximately KRW 50 million led to a dispute over roughly KRW 40 million in unpaid fees.
The design company claimed that it had delivered the work, passed the client's acceptance inspection, and retained email records supporting that position.
The client, however, questioned the authority of the employee involved in signing the agreement and the authenticity of the contract.
The client also claimed that the quality of the work was inadequate and that additional expenses had been incurred by hiring another designer.
The parties failed to resolve their disagreements concerning the contract's authenticity and the usability of the deliverables.
Mediation was unsuccessful.
The outcome did not establish that either party's allegations were correct. It demonstrates that competing claims about delivery and acceptance may remain unresolved when the parties disagree over the underlying contract and the work supplied.
A website development contract should therefore establish how acceptance will be documented.
The records should identify who inspected which functions, which items failed to meet the agreed criteria, and what was checked again after corrective work.
Source: Korea Creative Content Agency, 2018 Content Dispute Mediation Casebook, Case No. 2017-04949.
Define Acceptance Through Observable Results
Return to A's online store.
A enters a product name and price on the product registration screen and clicks Save.
However, the product does not appear in the customer-facing product list.
In this situation, the acceptance criterion should be more specific.
After — Illustrative Clause
The client shall verify that products can be registered and prices can be modified using the administrator account provided, and that the saved information is correctly reflected on the customer-facing website.
This establishes both the subject of the inspection and the method of verification.
The contract can also establish a period for communicating acceptance results and a procedure for corrective work.
For example, the parties could agree that the client will communicate the inspection results within seven business days after receiving the delivery notice.
If an item fails to satisfy the agreed criteria, the developer must correct it, after which the relevant item will be inspected again.
The seven-business-day period is an illustrative contractual term, not a universal statutory deadline.
Any defects identified during inspection should also be described precisely.
Instead of stating:
Product management does not work.
The client could record:
The price was changed and saved in the administrator interface, but the customer-facing website continues to display the previous price.
If the client wants a new function that was not included in the original agreement, the parties should separately agree on the additional scope, fees, and delivery schedule.
Acceptance testing is not a process for continuously expanding the client's requirements. It is a means of verifying whether the deliverables already agreed upon have been provided.
4. Connect Final Payment to the Statement of Work and Acceptance Criteria
Now return to the outstanding KRW 2 million.
The original contract contains the following provision.
Before
The client shall pay the remaining KRW 2 million upon completion of the website.
As discussed, the term "completion" may not adequately define the payment conditions.
Once the Statement of Work identifies the required functions and permissions, and the acceptance provision establishes how they will be verified, the payment clause should refer to those requirements.
After — Illustrative Clause
The client shall pay the remaining KRW 2 million within five business days after delivery of the deliverables specified in the attached Statement of Work, completion of the agreed acceptance procedures, and handover of the administrator permissions and operational materials designated for delivery.
The five-business-day period is illustrative. The actual payment deadline should be agreed upon by the parties.
The difference between the two clauses is significant.
The original clause relies on the abstract concept of project completion.
The revised clause connects payment to specific deliverables, an agreed acceptance process, and the handover of identified permissions and materials.
Supreme Court Decision: Can Final Payment Be Delayed Indefinitely Because Acceptance Has Not Been Completed?
A contract should not be drafted on the assumption that the client can postpone final payment indefinitely simply by declining to complete acceptance.
A relevant decision is the Supreme Court of Korea's judgment of September 10, 2019, Case Nos. 2017Da272486 and 2017Da272493.
The case involved a contract for the manufacture and installation of industrial equipment.
The parties agreed that final payment would follow completion and approval of the final acceptance inspection.
A dispute arose after the client refused inspection and notified the manufacturer that the contract was terminated.
The Supreme Court examined whether the equipment had been completed and the nature of the alleged defects.
It concluded that the manufacturer had completed the final stage of work contemplated by the contract.
In the circumstances of that case, completion and approval of the acceptance inspection had become impossible, and the Court held that the final payment had become due.
This was not a website development case.
Nevertheless, it illustrates why a contract should not assume that an acceptance condition allows payment to be postponed without limit.
A website development agreement should define the acceptance period, how results must be communicated, and the procedures for correcting and reinspecting nonconforming items.
The parties can also distinguish between the failure of an essential function and a minor outstanding correction, agreeing on the corresponding remediation deadlines and payment arrangements.
Source: Supreme Court of Korea, September 10, 2019, Case Nos. 2017Da272486 and 2017Da272493.
The objective is not to delay payment for as long as possible.
It is to establish a common standard for determining when the developer has fulfilled the agreed obligations and when the client must pay.
5. The Courts Also Distinguish Work Performed from Work Completed and Delivered
Article 665(1) of the Korean Civil Act generally provides that remuneration under a contract for work is payable simultaneously with delivery of the completed object.
Where delivery is not required, remuneration must be paid without delay after completion of the work.
However, a specific website development agreement must also be assessed according to its legal character and the payment terms agreed upon by the parties.
The Supreme Court's judgment of March 30, 2023, Case No. 2022Da289174, provides another reference point.
This case did not concern website development.
It involved a survey and design services contract for an urban development project and a dispute over whether remuneration could be claimed for work already performed after the contract was terminated before completion.
The Supreme Court explained that remuneration generally cannot be claimed when a contract for work is terminated before completion.
An exception may apply where special circumstances justify remuneration for the completed portion of the work.
The Court also explained that delivery under Article 665 encompasses not merely physical transfer but also the client's express or implied approval, following inspection, that the work has been completed in accordance with the contract.
The significance for contract drafting is that performing work and completing and delivering the agreed result are distinct matters.
The contract should provide criteria for determining whether the promised deliverables have actually been completed and handed over.
This judgment does not directly determine whether administrator credentials must be transferred or whether final payment is due under a particular website development agreement.
Those questions depend on the relevant contract and the actual performance of the parties.
Sources: Korean Civil Act, Article 665; Supreme Court of Korea, March 30, 2023, Case No. 2022Da289174.
6. What Should You Do If the Developer Has Already Requested Final Payment?
The provisions discussed so far are primarily preventive measures for a new agreement.
The approach is different if the contract has already been signed and the developer is demanding final payment.
Rather than unilaterally imposing new delivery requirements, first compare the existing agreement with what has actually been provided.
Begin by collecting the development contract, quotation, Statement of Work, and relevant records of discussions during the project.
Next, examine the functions delivered and the administrator accounts and operational materials received.
If the quotation includes administrator access but no account has been delivered, determine how that promise was incorporated into the contract.
If an account has been provided but an agreed price editing function does not work, document the precise problem.
When communicating with the developer, identify the issue rather than making a general allegation that the website was not properly developed.
For example:
The product price editing function included in the quotation cannot be used through the administrator account currently provided. Please confirm whether this function has been delivered and provide a schedule for correcting the issue.
This statement connects the agreed requirement, the actual problem, and the requested corrective action.
Keep records of the developer's response and any subsequent corrections.
However, identifying an incomplete item does not automatically extinguish the obligation to pay the outstanding balance.
If the dispute concerns withholding payment, termination, or damages, a separate legal assessment of the agreement and the parties' actual performance may be required.
7. What Can Business Owners Prepare Themselves, and When Is Professional Review Appropriate?
Business owners preparing to commission a website can begin by listing the screens and functions they need and checking whether those requirements appear in the quotation.
They can also discuss administrator permissions, domain and hosting arrangements, and acceptance criteria for functions they intend to use themselves.
However, inconsistencies may arise when the quotation promises functions that are absent from the contract, or when delivery obligations in the Statement of Work are not reflected in the acceptance and final payment provisions.
In such situations, the consistency of the contract documents should be examined as a whole.
Article 2(1)2 of the Administrative Scrivener Act includes the preparation of documents relating to rights, obligations, and certification of facts within the professional scope of Korean administrative scriveners.
Article 2(2)(a) of its Enforcement Decree specifies the preparation of documents concerning transactions, including contracts and agreements, within that scope. Work restricted under other laws remains excluded.
Within the permitted scope, a Korean administrative scrivener may assist with preparing contract-related documents that consistently reflect the terms agreed upon by the parties, including the development scope, acceptance criteria, administrator access, handover obligations, and final payment conditions.
Technical expert evaluation of a website's completion and legal representation in civil disputes are separate matters.
Where contractual breach, termination, or damages are contested, review by a qualified attorney may be necessary.
Sources: Administrative Scrivener Act, Article 2(1)2; Enforcement Decree of the Administrative Scrivener Act, Article 2(2).
Conclusion: Delivery Standards Matter More Than a Delivery Date Alone
If a website development project costs KRW 5 million, the central issue is what the business has agreed to receive in exchange for that payment.
The contract should establish whether the functions in the quotation form part of the agreement, whether the agreed functions and permissions can actually be used, and which conditions trigger final payment.
A website development contract should not end with a promise to deliver by a particular date. It should establish exactly what must be delivered, in what condition, and how completion will be determined.
In the next article, we will examine personal data processing outsourcing agreements for businesses that entrust customer inquiries and order management to external service providers.
If you are preparing a website development contract or reviewing an existing delivery or final payment issue in South Korea, you can request a free initial review to determine whether contract-document drafting assistance by a Korean administrative scrivener is available for your situation.