Creators and the Industry
Korean Webtoons and Manhwa
Course 1 · Chapter 8 · Creators and the Industry
Earlier chapters described platforms, formats and titles. This chapter asks about the people who make webtoons. The sources are uneven: one creator's career is documented in detail, the money figures come from a platform, and the claims about working conditions are few, loosely sourced and sometimes severe. The chapter reports what is there, marks what is missing, and does not fill the gap.
One Documented Career: Kang Full
The article on Kang Full (Kang Do-yeong, born 1974) is the most detailed account of a webtoon creator I found. It describes him as "one of the first-generation webtoon artists in South Korea" and gives his career in dated steps, which makes a useful test case. The facts below are the article's.
- Slow start. He "began his career as a cartoonist in 1997", and "his early work faced limited commercial success. Of the two publishers that showed interest in his series, one went bankrupt during serialization."
- The move online (2002). He launched his own website and began a daily comic strip there. The article says his move online "was driven by a lack of interest from traditional publishers and a preference for long form storytelling". By July 2002 the site "averaged 10,000 daily visitors". In late 2002 he signed with Daum, then joined "the newly established Daum Manhwa-sok-sesang, the precursor to Daum Webtoon".
- Breakthrough (2003–2004). Pure Love Comics ran on Daum from August 2003 to April 2004, "averaged 2 million daily page views and reached a total of 60 million views", became a print book and a 2008 film. In November 2004 he "signed a 10 million yen (approximately 100 million won) publishing deal with Japan's Futabasha, which marked a record for South Korean comic exports at the time".
- Scale. By the end of 2008 his "collected works had surpassed 300 million cumulative page views on the Daum platform", and Every Moment of Your Life (2010–2011) "reached a total of 150 million views". The article lists film and television adaptations, including Apartment (a 2006 film), The Neighbor (a 2012 film "drawing 2.4 million viewers") and, from a 2015 webtoon, Moving.
What the career does and doesn't show
The article's timeline contradicts the idea of overnight success: a career begun in 1997, five years of limited success, a move to a personal website, and a breakthrough around 2003. It also shows how the money figures work. The big numbers here (60 million, 300 million, 150 million) are page views, and the one payment figure is a single foreign publishing deal. The article gives no income, no contract terms with Daum and no cost of production, so it tells us how popular a creator became and says nothing about how much he earned.
What the Sources Say About Pay
Chapter 4 gave the platform article's figures: $27 million paid to more than 120,000 English-language creators between 2020 and 2021 (about $225 each), "top creators" in Korea earning "an average of $250,000 per year", and one creator earning "around $9 million in 2021". Chapter 3 gave the Webtoon article's models: pay depends on page views, and amateur creators earned from fan "credit" until 2019. The articles I read say nothing more about earnings, so the typical creator's income is not stated anywhere I could find. The three figures answer different questions and cannot be averaged.
Contracts and Conditions: What Is Claimed
| Claim | Source in the articles, and what is missing |
|---|---|
| Naver introduced ads on webtoons in 2008 but "did not fairly share the ad revenue with artists". | Webtoon (platform) article. No figures, and no named judge of "fairly". The article says a revenue share (Page Profit Share) first came in 2013. |
| Naver "absorbed the electronic publication rights of Korean artists for a small fee", which "allowed them to monopolize works for a long time". | Same article. No contract, fee or year named. |
| Aspiring creators submitted free comics; only "the 0.1%" received "a formal serialization"; freelance creators "could not unite". | Same article. The 0.1% has no source. |
| Vertical scroll "demand[ed] over 100 cuts, which strained artists' health"; "Kakao Webtoons' top artist... died at the age of 37 due to overwork"; "the BBC reported on artists suffering from severe labor and exploitation". | Same article. The artist is unnamed, no date or cause is sourced, and I did not read the BBC report. I report the claim and do not treat it as established. |
| A late-delivery penalty charged "up to 9% of their monthly income" if a manuscript was more than two days late; the Korean Webtoon Authors Association criticised it in September 2017, and Lezhin said in November 2017 the penalty would end by 1 February 2018. | Lezhin Comics article. This is the one concrete contract term with named parties and dates in the articles I read. |
| A "forum organized by the culture ministry was held" in January 2018 "to address the issue of abusive practices within the industry". | Lezhin Comics article. A state response is mentioned, but the forum's outcome is not. |
What the Sources Don't Say
- How a studio is organised: how many assistants, who writes and who draws, and who pays whom (Chapter 4 also found this gap).
- Typical hours, rates per episode or contract lengths.
- How many creators are in the Korean Webtoon Authors Association, or what unions or collective bargaining exist.
- Whether conditions have changed since 2017 or 2018, beyond the late-penalty change above.
- Any creator's own account, apart from the Kang Full article's quoted remarks about why he moved online.
If you want this subject properly, look for the Korean Webtoon Authors Association's statements, government surveys of webtoon creators, and news reporting, and treat each as a source with its own interest.
Reading a Claim About Creators
- Views or income? A page-view total says how popular a work was, and not what its creator earned.
- Top or typical? "Top creators" and "all creators" are different groups.
- Dated and named? The late penalty has parties and dates; "the 0.1%" has neither.
- Overnight? Check how many years came before the breakthrough.
- Whose account? A platform, an association, a journalist and a creator will each describe the same situation differently.
Exercises
Using the Kang Full article, give four dated steps in his career from 1997 to 2004, and say why the article's timeline does not support an "overnight success" story. Then say what the Kang Full article settles about the "Kang Full" entries in Chapters 1, 4 and 6.
Explain why a figure of 300 million cumulative page views tells you nothing about a creator's income. Then list the three pay figures from Chapter 4 and say why they cannot be averaged.
From the claims table, pick the claim with the most concrete detail and the one with the least, and explain the difference. Then name three things about creators' working lives that the sources do not say.
Quick Reference
- Kang Full: career from 1997; personal website 2002; Daum, Pure Love Comics 2003–2004 (60 million views); Futabasha deal 2004; 300 million Daum views by end 2008; Moving (2015)
- Pay figures: $27 million to 120,000 creators (2020–21); $250,000 top-creator average; $9 million for one creator (2021)
- Concrete contract term: late penalty up to 9% of monthly income, criticised September 2017, ended by 1 February 2018
- Loosely sourced: unfair ad share, rights fees, the 0.1%, over 100 cuts, an artist's death at 37, the BBC report
- Not covered: studio structure, hours, rates, associations and unions, creators' own accounts
Next chapter: Rules, Ratings and Controversies, which covers age ratings and regulation and reports disputes as reported, with owners.