Families of victims and citizen groups in Gwangju rejected an apology from Shinsegae Group Chairman Jung Yong-jin regarding a controversial Starbucks marketing campaign.
The dispute centers on the use of the May 18 Gwangju Democratization Movement as a promotional event called "Tank Day." The incident has sparked a broader debate over the commercialization and distortion of South Korea's democratic history, leading to calls for stricter legal penalties for those who misrepresent the uprising.
Protesters staged simultaneous demonstrations at approximately 10 Starbucks locations [1] across Gwangju, including sites near the former Jeonnam Provincial Office. The groups said the chairman's apology was a superficial attempt to avoid accountability.
Kim Hyung-mi, the sister of the late activist Kim Hyung-young, criticized the nature of the apology during a press conference. "It is like killing the spirits of May 18 a second and third time," Kim said. "If you are the chairman, take responsibility and resign. Is the apology in today's press conference the level of Shinsegae?"
An anonymous representative from a Gwangju citizen group said the apology from Jung Yong-jin was merely a tool for evasion. The groups are now urging the government to strengthen punishments for the distortion of the May 18 movement to prevent similar corporate incidents in the future.
The controversy began when Starbucks utilized the historical event for a marketing push, which critics argued trivialized the violence and sacrifice associated with the 1980 uprising. While the company issued a statement of regret, the affected families maintain that the harm caused to the victims' memory cannot be erased by a corporate statement.
“"It is like killing the spirits of May 18 a second and third time."”
This conflict highlights the deep societal sensitivity in South Korea regarding the May 18 Gwangju Uprising. By framing a democratic tragedy as a marketing opportunity, Shinsegae and Starbucks touched upon a raw national nerve, shifting the conversation from a corporate PR crisis to a demand for legal protections against historical distortion.





