[Game & Digital Content Licensing Deep Dive ⑥] Launching an Overseas Game in Korea: Who Handles Rating and Registration? — Korean Publishers, Self-Rating, and Domestic Representatives Explained

Hello, I'm Jean Ji, a Certified Administrative Agent in Korea.

A game company in Singapore has developed a global mobile game.

The game is already being serviced in the United States and Southeast Asia.

The company now plans to add Korean localization and make the game available to users in Korea.

The servers will remain in Singapore.

The company has no Korean corporation.

Several options are being considered.

It could enter into an agreement with a Korean publisher.

It could release the game directly through an app marketplace.

Or, if required, it could appoint a domestic representative in Korea.

Then someone in the internal meeting asks:

“The game was developed overseas and the servers are also overseas. Who is supposed to handle the Korean game rating and regulatory procedures?”

A second question follows:

“If we appoint a domestic representative in Korea, doesn’t that person handle all Korean regulatory procedures for us?”

Neither question can be answered with a simple yes.

Even if a game was developed overseas, Korean regulatory procedures under the Game Industry Promotion Act may still need to be reviewed if the game is distributed or made available to users in Korea.

At the same time, this does not mean that every foreign game company must establish a Korean corporation or appoint a Korean publisher before entering the Korean market.

The key issue is not the nationality of the game.

It is who distributes and provides the game in Korea, and through what service structure.

Since October 23, 2025, certain overseas game distributors and game providers have also been required to appoint a domestic representative in Korea.

Under the regulations currently in effect in 2026, the requirement may apply based on factors such as total annual revenue, the scale of mobile installations in Korea, or a reporting request from the Ministry of Culture, Sports and Tourism where there is a significant concern regarding disruption of the game distribution order.

In this article, we will examine the four roles that overseas game companies should distinguish before entering the Korean market:

the overseas developer, the Korean publisher, the self-rating operator, and the domestic representative.

---

Game & Digital Content Licensing Deep Dive Series

1. Do game developers and publishers need separate business registrations?
2. When should you apply for a game rating in Korea?
3. Where should you apply for a game rating?
4. Do game updates require a new rating?
5. What must be disclosed when a game includes probability-based items?
6. Who handles the regulatory process when an overseas-developed game is launched in Korea? — This article
7. What happens when the representative, address, or registered game business details change?
8. Is closing a game business as simple as canceling the business registration?
9. What happens to existing registrations when acquiring a game company or game business?

---

1. If the Server Is Overseas, Is a Korean Game Rating Still Required?

This is one of the first issues overseas game companies may misunderstand.

The game was developed outside Korea.

The servers are located in Singapore or the United States.

The payment system is also controlled by the overseas headquarters.

It may therefore seem natural to assume that Korean game regulations do not apply.

But server location alone does not determine the answer.

A Korean Supreme Court decision addressed this issue directly.

Supreme Court Decision 2008Do3970 — An Overseas Server Does Not Automatically Exempt a Game from Korean Rating Requirements

Under an older version of the game rating system, internal review rules once referred to games using domestic servers.

Based on that language, an argument was made that a game using an overseas server could be provided to Korean users without obtaining a Korean rating.

The Supreme Court rejected that argument.

In its October 23, 2008 decision, 2008Do3970, the Court held that unless a statutory exception applied, a game had to receive the required rating before being distributed or made available for use, and that this requirement did not depend simply on whether the server was located inside or outside Korea.

The Korean rating system has changed significantly since that decision.

Today, Korea has a self-rating system and separate provisions concerning certain overseas games.

The 2008 decision should therefore not be applied mechanically to every current distribution structure.

But one principle remains important:

A company should not assume that Korean game regulations can be ignored merely because the servers are located outside Korea.

---

2. Four Different Parties Should Be Distinguished Before Launching an Overseas Game in Korea

When an overseas game company prepares for a Korean release, all Korean operations are sometimes grouped under the single label of “Korean publishing.”

From a regulatory perspective, that can be misleading.

At least four different roles should be distinguished.

① Overseas Developer or Overseas Publisher

This is the foreign company that develops the game or owns and manages the relevant intellectual property or service rights.

It may provide the game directly to Korean users, or it may grant Korean service rights to another business.

② Korean Publisher

A Korean publisher may import the game into the Korean market and handle local distribution and service operations.

Depending on the actual activities performed under the agreement, the company may need to determine whether it qualifies as a game distribution business and whether Korean registration requirements apply.

③ Self-Rating Operator

A self-rating operator is a platform business designated under Korean law to classify eligible games itself.

Certain overseas games may be provided to Korean users through this route.

④ Domestic Representative

A domestic representative is a person or entity that certain large overseas game businesses must appoint in Korea to perform specific statutory functions.

One distinction is especially important:

A Korean publisher and a domestic representative are not the same thing.

Likewise, the fact that a platform has completed a rating procedure does not mean that all registration requirements applicable to a Korean publisher have automatically been satisfied.

These roles should be separated when designing the Korean service structure.

---

3. Must Every Overseas Game Appoint a Korean Publisher?

Not necessarily.

The Korean Game Industry Promotion Act contains a separate provision for the provision of certain overseas games.

Article 21-5 defines an “overseas game” in this context as a game that is not primarily intended for distribution in Korea, and permits certain games meeting the statutory requirements to be provided to Korean users through a self-rating operator.

Under this structure, the self-rating operator must enter into an agreement with the overseas distributor concerning provision of the game in Korea, classify the game, make the rating result easily available to users, and notify the Game Rating and Administration Committee of the result within five business days.

Accordingly, where an overseas company already operates a global service and makes the game available in Korea through a designated self-rating platform,

it would be incorrect to conclude that:

“The game cannot be launched in Korea because there is no Korean publisher.”

However, there is an important limitation.

The statutory concept of an “overseas game” does not simply mean “a game developed in another country.”

It refers to a game that is not primarily intended for distribution in Korea.

For example, a game already available in 50 countries that later adds Korean localization may present a different structure from a game developed with Korea as a major target market and released under an exclusive Korean publishing agreement.

Accordingly, a company should not assume that the overseas-game provision under Article 21-5 applies simply because the development work occurred outside Korea.

---

4. Can an Adults-Only Game Use the Same Self-Rating Route?

There are exceptions.

Article 21-5 permits self-rating operators to provide certain overseas games, but it does not cover every type of game.

Games that fall into the Korean Adults Only category, as well as certain games provided through youth game businesses or general game businesses, are excluded from this particular overseas-game route.

Accordingly, an overseas company should not assume:

“The game already has an adult rating in another country's app store, so we can release it in Korea the same way.”

The appropriate Korean rating route must be checked separately.

Depending on the content, additional issues involving gambling characteristics or other regulatory review may also arise.

In practice, the distribution route and the expected Korean rating should be reviewed together.

---

5. Can a Rating Obtained Through Platform A Be Used Automatically on Platform B?

This is another issue overseas companies often overlook.

A company may complete a Korean rating process through one platform and assume that the same result automatically applies across all other platforms.

That is not necessarily the case.

Under Article 21-4 of the Game Industry Promotion Act, where a game classified by one self-rating operator is distributed by another self-rating operator, a new rating process may be required through the second operator.

Accordingly, if the company plans to distribute the same game through:

• one mobile app marketplace,
• another mobile platform,
• a PC platform,
• or its own direct-download service,

the rating effect for each distribution channel should be examined.

The fact that the game itself is identical does not automatically mean:

“We already received a Korean rating on Platform A, so we can use that rating everywhere.”

For multi-platform launches, the release schedule should therefore include not only the build completion date but also the rating route for each platform.

---

6. If a Korean Publisher Is Involved, Who Needs Game Distribution Business Registration?

Assume Company A enters into an agreement with Korean Publisher B.

Publisher B reviews Korean localization,

conducts Korean marketing,

handles game operations and customer support,

and receives the right to provide the game in Korea from the overseas headquarters.

In this situation, the analysis should not depend solely on whether the contract calls Company B a “publisher.”

The actual activities matter.

Under the Game Industry Promotion Act, a game distribution business generally refers to a business that imports games or owns or manages relevant rights and supplies games to game providers or other distributors.

A person or company that operates a game production or game distribution business is generally required to register with the competent local authority.

Therefore, if the Korean publisher actually imports the overseas game, manages the relevant rights, and is responsible for domestic distribution,

the company should review whether it qualifies as a game distribution business and whether registration is required.

The existence of an overseas developer does not automatically eliminate Korean registration issues.

At the same time, a Korean company that merely provides translation or advertising services does not automatically become a game distributor.

The important questions are:

Who imports the game?
Who holds the Korean service rights?
Who is responsible for domestic distribution?

The contractual label alone does not answer those questions.

---

7. Who Should Apply for the Korean Rating: the Overseas Developer or the Korean Publisher?

The basic structure of Article 21 of the Game Industry Promotion Act requires a person intending to produce or distribute a game for distribution or provision to users to obtain the required rating before the relevant production or distribution activity.

In practice, the Korean service structure should therefore be determined first.

If the overseas company provides the game directly through a self-rating platform, the self-rating route should be reviewed.

If a Korean publisher is responsible for Korean distribution, the publisher's contractual position, game distribution business registration, and rating application structure should be considered together.

If the game is Adults Only or otherwise does not qualify for the applicable self-rating route, a separate general rating procedure may need to be reviewed.

This means that the first question should not be:

“Who should submit the rating application?”

The first question should be:

“Who will distribute and provide this game to users in Korea?”

Once that is clear, the appropriate rating applicant and procedure can be determined more logically.

---

8. What Is the Difference Between a Domestic Representative and a Korean Publisher?

This is one of the most important recent changes in Korean game regulation.

Since October 23, 2025, certain overseas game companies have been required to appoint a domestic representative in Korea.

Article 31-2 of the Game Industry Promotion Act applies to certain game distributors and game providers that do not have an address or place of business in Korea and meet the thresholds prescribed by Presidential Decree.

As of 2026, the relevant criteria include situations such as:

• total revenue in the previous year of at least KRW 1 trillion,
• distribution or provision of a game meeting the prescribed level of average daily installations on mobile devices sold in Korea,
• or receipt of a reporting request from the Minister of Culture, Sports and Tourism due to an incident, or potential incident, that may seriously disrupt the game distribution order.

Does appointing a domestic representative mean that all Korean regulatory procedures are now handled by that representative?

No.

The core statutory functions of the domestic representative relate to specific reporting obligations and game information disclosure obligations under the Game Industry Promotion Act.

A domestic representative is therefore a statutory point of contact and compliance representative for specified duties.

The role does not automatically make the representative:

a Korean publisher,

a substitute for game distribution business registration,

or the party responsible for every rating procedure.

Confusing these roles can lead to the incorrect assumption that:

“We appointed a domestic representative, so all Korean game regulatory procedures are complete.”

That is not how the system works.

---

9. What Happens If a Required Domestic Representative Is Not Appointed?

If an overseas game business falls within the statutory criteria but fails to appoint a domestic representative, an administrative fine may be imposed.

Under Article 48 of the Game Industry Promotion Act, failure to appoint a domestic representative where required may result in a fine of up to KRW 20 million.

A domestic representative is also more than a name listed on a contact page.

Where the representative violates the Game Industry Promotion Act while performing the statutory duties assigned to the representative, the relevant act may be treated as an act of the game business itself.

For overseas companies subject to the requirement, it is therefore important not merely to appoint a representative formally.

The company should also ensure that a functioning communication and document-delivery process exists between the overseas headquarters and the Korean representative.

Korean authorities have continued to operate and develop the system following its implementation, including policy discussions concerning the domestic representative制度.

---

10. Are Overseas Game Companies Actually Subject to Korean Post-Launch Enforcement? — 356 of 544 Cases Involved Overseas Games

An overseas business might ask:

“If we have no Korean corporation, can Korean authorities actually enforce these rules against us?”

Early monitoring statistics concerning probability-based item disclosure provide a useful reference point.

During approximately the first 200 days after Korea's probability-item disclosure regime took effect in March 2024, 544 games were subject to correction requests.

Of those,

188 were domestic games,

while 356 were overseas games, representing 65.4% of the total.

These figures relate specifically to probability-item disclosure obligations.

They do not mean that 65.4% of all Korean game-law violations involve overseas games.

However, they do demonstrate one important point:

An overseas game is not automatically excluded from Korean post-launch monitoring simply because the operator is located outside Korea.

At the time, difficulties in communicating with and enforcing corrective action against overseas operators were also identified.

One policy objective behind the later domestic representative system was to strengthen effective regulatory communication and protection of Korean users.

---

11. What Is One of the Most Dangerous Clauses in an Overseas-Korean Publishing Agreement?

A Korean publishing agreement may contain a clause such as:

“The Korean publisher shall be responsible for compliance with Korean law.”

At first glance, this seems simple.

In practice, that sentence may not be enough.

To complete a Korean rating process, the publisher may need the actual game build and detailed content information from the overseas developer.

To comply with probability-based item disclosure rules, it may need the actual server-side probability data.

To determine whether a post-launch update requires a content modification report, it may need advance information from the development team about the functions being changed.

Now consider the following situation.

The overseas headquarters says:

“Korean compliance is the publisher's responsibility.”

The Korean publisher responds:

“The overseas headquarters controls the server, so we cannot obtain the necessary data.”

The administrative process may then become difficult or impossible to complete properly.

For that reason, Korean publishing agreements should consider not only who is “responsible for compliance,” but also how regulatory information will actually be provided.

Relevant arrangements may include:

• provision of game builds and content descriptions required for rating,
• advance notice of planned updates,
• provision of actual probability data for probability-based items,
• advance review of advertising and marketing materials,
• cooperation with information requests from Korean authorities,
• allocation of responsibilities where corrective action or content modification procedures arise,
• and handling of existing ratings, registrations, and user-related data if the service ends or the Korean publisher changes.

Ultimately, appointing a Korean publisher is less important than answering:

Who holds the information required for Korean compliance, and when must that information be provided?

---

12. In What Order Should an Overseas Game Company Prepare for a Korean Launch?

Return to Company A.

A practical Korean launch process can be organized in the following order.

Step 1. Determine the Korean Service Structure

The first decision should not be which rating authority to use.

The company should first determine whether:

• the overseas headquarters will provide the game directly,
• a self-rating platform will be used,
• Korean service rights will be granted to a Korean publisher,
• or a Korean corporation or branch will be established.

Step 2. Determine the Rating Route

The company should then examine:

• whether the game qualifies for the overseas-game provision structure under Article 21-5,
• whether self-rating is available,
• whether the game is excluded from that route because of its expected rating,
• and whether a separate rating application is required.

Step 3. Review Game Distribution Business Registration

If a Korean publisher imports the game, manages the relevant rights, and supplies it within Korea, the company should review whether the publisher falls within the definition of a game distribution business.

If so, the applicable registration procedure should be confirmed.

Step 4. Confirm the Rating Effect for Each Platform

Do not assume that a rating obtained through one self-rating operator will automatically be accepted by another.

If the game will be launched simultaneously through multiple app marketplaces or platforms, the rating process for each should be reviewed separately.

Step 5. Review Post-Launch Obligations

Regulatory work does not end when the game is released.

Depending on the game and service structure, ongoing obligations may include:

• rating display,
• probability-based item disclosure,
• content modification reporting after updates,
• advertising requirements,
• and review of changes in the game's operating structure.

Step 6. Determine Whether a Domestic Representative Is Required

If the overseas game distributor or provider has no address or place of business in Korea, the company should determine whether it meets the applicable revenue, installation, or other statutory criteria.

If the requirement applies, a domestic representative should be appointed and the necessary related information should be organized.

Taken together, the key question is not simply:

“Do we need a Korean publisher?”

The company should answer at least six questions:

1. Who distributes the game?
2. Who provides the game to Korean users?
3. Which platforms will be used?
4. Who handles the rating?
5. Who is subject to Korean business registration?
6. Who handles post-launch disclosure and reporting obligations?

The Korean service structure becomes clear only when these roles are aligned.

---

What Can an Overseas Game Company Handle Internally, and When Is Professional Review Useful?

An overseas developer that already operates a global service and simply adds Korea through one self-rating platform may be able to prepare the process internally where the rating route and distribution structure are straightforward.

The analysis becomes more complicated when:

• a separate Korean publisher is involved,
• the game will be launched on multiple platforms,
• an Adults Only rating may be possible,
• the game includes probability-based items or paid in-game currency,
• or the service model involves a complex monetization structure.

The review becomes particularly important where several questions arise at the same time:

whether the overseas headquarters or Korean publisher qualifies as the relevant distributor,

whether the overseas-game self-rating route is available,

and whether the overseas company is required to appoint a domestic representative.

In these situations, the contractual structure and the actual service structure should be reviewed together.

Within the lawful scope of administrative practice in Korea, a Certified Administrative Agent may assist with reviewing the respective roles of the overseas developer and Korean publisher, the distribution structure, rating route, game distribution business registration, domestic representative requirements, and supporting documentation for the relevant administrative procedures.

Professional review does not guarantee a particular rating or administrative decision.

---

Conclusion: For an Overseas Game Launch in Korea, the First Question Is Not Where the Game Was Developed

Return to Company A's original question.

“The game was developed overseas and the servers are outside Korea. Who handles the Korean procedures?”

The fact that a game was developed overseas does not by itself eliminate Korean game rating or other regulatory requirements.

The Korean Supreme Court has also held that use of an overseas server did not, by itself, allow a game to be provided in Korea without the required rating.

At the same time, not every overseas game must necessarily be launched through a Korean publisher.

Korean law contains a separate mechanism under which certain overseas games may be provided to Korean users through a self-rating operator.

If a Korean publisher actually imports and distributes the overseas game, game distribution business registration should be reviewed.

If the game is distributed through multiple self-rating platforms, the rating effect for each platform should also be checked separately.

Certain large overseas game companies must additionally consider the domestic representative requirement that took effect in October 2025.

And one distinction remains particularly important:

A domestic representative does not automatically replace a Korean publisher or the party responsible for the rating process.

Ultimately, an overseas game launch in Korea should begin by mapping the relationship:

Overseas Developer → Korean Publisher → Platform → Korean User

and then determining which procedures apply to that structure:

Rating → Game Distribution Business Registration → Disclosure Obligations → Content Modification → Domestic Representative

If you are preparing to launch an overseas-developed game in Korea and it is unclear whether a Korean publisher is necessary, whether the self-rating route is available, whether game distribution business registration is required, or whether a domestic representative must be appointed, you can request a free initial review based on the actual service structure and contractual relationships.