BRAND MONITORING

Before an enforcement notice arrives, the brand should know first

The brand receives the sanction, but sellers and reviewers often create the risky wording. Phrases you never wrote may be selling under your brand name.

The Problem Is in Channels Outside the Brand's Hands

Advertising review sees only the advertising materials submitted by the brand. Administrative enforcement is centered on after-the-fact detection and sanctions, so by the time a sanction notice arrives, problematic wording has often been exposed for a long time. In the meantime, suspected noncompliant phrases such as "instead of an injection" or "disease improvement" accumulate without the brand knowing: in open-market seller product names, reviewer blog posts, and influencer hashtags.

MFDS online unfair-advertising detections surged from about 59,000 cases in 2022 to about 97,000 cases in 2024, based on MFDS counts and press reports, and MFDS has publicly discussed operating AI-based monitoring systems. As enforcement becomes automated, not knowing how your brand is being sold at the distribution stage is itself a risk.

One Category, One Day of Investigation

These are measured figures from a sample report investigating the "oral glutathione" category on July 5, 2026. The four investigated channel types were open markets, blogs/cafes, YouTube/Instagram, and brand-owned malls. Every item passed original-quote capture and URL revisit verification. The verification method is disclosed on request.

46verified suspected noncompliant phrases

4/4found in all four channel types

16red-level items needing immediate review

Red — immediate review needed. Disease treatment/prevention claims, or risk of being mistaken for a drug or injection. Examples: "instead of an injection," "improves spots and blemishes"
Orange — high. Unrecognized functional claims, or risk of making general foods look like health functional foods.
Yellow — caution. Exaggerated or absolute expressions, deceptive testimonials, or sponsorship-disclosure issues.

In this first investigated category, suspected noncompliant wording that appeared not to have been written directly by the brand appeared in every one of the four channel types. We also observed circumstances suggesting agency-order structures, such as different bloggers repeatedly posting similar wording for the same product. Detailed support is included in the sample report.

This service provides monitoring information; it is not legal advice or expert appraisal. Severity classification is only a textual comparison against categories prohibited by Article 8 of the Food Labeling and Advertising Act, not a legal judgment on violation. Final judgment belongs to the relevant authorities, and legal response should be discussed with a qualified professional such as an attorney.

What You Receive Each Week

Complete list of suspected noncompliant wording — original quote, source URL, and stored screenshot evidence.
Severity classification and reference legal category — red-grade items are notified immediately on confirmation.
New occurrence and deletion tracking — suspected noncompliant wording appears and disappears every week. We look at the flow, not a snapshot.
Channel risk map — identifies whether the risk originates from sellers, reviewers, or influencers.

This service is at an early stage. One sample report, with all 46 items verified, is the entire performance record so far. For first brands, we therefore speak only with measured results. Not hiding that we are small is the same kind of honesty we sell.

What We Do Not Do

We do not provide wording consulting such as "this expression is acceptable." Our work stops at detection and reference legal-category presentation; response belongs to the brand and legal professionals. This line protects the independence of the public verdicts we operate, and that independence creates trust in this report.

Confidentiality and Separation from Public Verdicts

We answer this first because you are likely to ask: "Will the monitoring report content appear in your public verdicts?"

Monitoring reports are provided to no one except the requesting brand and are not disclosed. Not to the press, not to authorities, and not on our site.
The public verdict database operates only at the ingredient x claim level, not by brand. We do not publish verdicts naming a specific company or product.
Subscription to the monitoring service has no effect on public verdicts — favorable or unfavorable. There is no penalty for not subscribing and no privilege for subscribing.

If these three points break, the trust that justifies our existence ends. They are not promises; they are conditions for survival.

Start by Checking Your Own Brand

Start by checking what is happening in distribution channels under your own brand name. If you send a brand name or category, we can begin with a one-time snapshot report at sample level. Category-level reports are provided with specific businesses anonymized, and every report carries restrictions against off-purpose use and redistribution.

Ask about a report