Press Coverage

Singer and actor Cha Eun-woo's method of reducing his tax burden by opening a one-person agency (corporation) has become a new 'tax saving' trend among celebrities in recent years. However, the National Tax Service noted that these corporations often have no real functions, including management, but only serve to collect payments for entertainment activities, and are defining them as 'paper companies for tax avoidance purposes' and increasing the intensity of crackdowns. The National Tax Service uses evidence to determine the human and material substance of a corporation, such as offices, employee employment, and contracts, as a standard for judging tax evasion by providing differentiated services that are distinct from existing agencies and contributing to increased sales. Aiming for tax savings... According to the Hankook Ilbo coverage of the recent full-scale crackdown, the main reason why one-person agencies representing famous celebrities or their families have proliferated is because they can achieve tax savings by applying the corporate tax (highest tax rate of 26.4%), which is less burdensome than the personal comprehensive income tax, which has a top tax rate of 49.5% (including local taxes). The CEO of an entertainment agency said, "As a celebrity's income increases, the burden of progressive taxes also increases, so asset management companies are recommending the establishment of a one-person corporation. Most high-income celebrities handle expenses that way." Controversy over tax evasion through 'one-person agencies' has been on the rise since last year. The National Tax Service took issue with celebrities' one-person agencies through a 'planned investigation'. The National Tax Service believes that a celebrity using a corporation with no other functions as a channel to receive payment while maintaining a management contract with an existing agency is a trick to 'change only the taxable entity from an individual to a corporation.' Noh Jong-eon, a lawyer and CEO of Existence Law Firm, pointed out, “If we recognize cases like Cha Eun-woo’s as ‘tax saving,’ it would be like encouraging ordinary office workers to set up a corporation, receive a salary, and reduce taxes.” Prior to Cha Eun-woo, actors Lee Ha-nui, Park Hee-soon, Yoo Yeon-seok, Lee Jun-ki, and Cho Jin-woong also paid fines ranging from hundreds of millions to billions of won due to suspicions of tax evasion by a one-person agency. The agencies consistently explained that “it is just a difference in the interpretation and application of tax laws.” Although the surcharge is paid, it is believed that it is subject to corporate tax. In fact, some celebrities objected to the National Tax Service's decision and filed a request for judgment from the Tax Tribunal (at the stage before administrative litigation). However, no final decision has been made in any case yet. Tax evasion through one-person agencies is legally a ‘grey area’. National Tax Service's standard... "The actual function of a corporation" The National Tax Service does not take issue with the establishment of a celebrity's one-person agency itself. The problem is that a corporation is used as a 'conduit' (an entity that simply acts as a conduit and then disappears) without any actual function. As a result of Hankook Ilbo's recent analysis of cases of pre-tax adequacy review decisions related to single-celebrity agencies, the standards presented by the National Tax Service when considering 'substantial functions' were specifically identified. ① First, the physical and human substance must be clear. Tax evasion is suspected if there are no traces of setting up an office or hiring employees, as well as a contribution contract with the new corporation as a party, a business entrustment contract, or a contract containing the specific scope of work of the corporation. ② Here, there must also be a record of actually providing ‘services’ as a corporation. It is not enough to just set up an office and hire employees, and you need a contract to prove that you have provided 'services' commensurate with your income. The National Tax Service pointed out, “If the revenue of the corporation in question is nothing other than settlement money generated from entertainment activities based on the exclusive contract between the celebrity and the existing agency, and the only wage earner is a celebrity, it appears that it does not have the ability to manage the celebrity.” Experts say that Cha Eun-woo also appears to have difficulty meeting both conditions, considering the facts revealed so far. Ahn Won-yong, a lawyer at Dasol Tax Firm, said, "To date, there has been no case where the 'substantial function' of the corporation has been recognized and the surcharge has been returned in the case of a one-person agency. The key is whether the actual purpose of establishment and operation of the corporation can be proven, and it seems that celebrities did not think that this would be a problem." However, as the tangible tax savings are clear, the establishment of one-person agencies is expected to continue for the time being despite the risk. However, some point out that celebrities should take the Cha Eun-woo controversy as an opportunity to examine the actual functions and transaction structures of corporations. Ja-young Yoon, senior attorney at Daeryun Law Firm, said, “As celebrities’ image is important, they need to receive strict advice in advance from a tax risk management perspective,” and added, “Self-inspection based on the National Tax Service’s decisions is also a good method.” Reporter Na Gwang-hyeon (name@hankookilbo.com) Reporter Shin Eun-byeol (ebshin@hankookilbo.com) Reporter Lee Yu-jin (iyz@hankookilbo.com)[View full article] ‘How can Cha Eun-woo be cleared of tax evasion suspicions?’... The National Tax Service’s answer is, “Corporations must have traces of business” (Shortcut)

A man who was handed over to the prosecution on charges of molesting a medical staff member who was treating him received a decision not to indict him. According to the legal community on the 3rd, the Changwon District Prosecutors' Office decided not to indict Mr. A, in his 40s, who was sent on charges of forcible harassment and defamation in December last year. Mr. A was accused of molesting Mr. B, a medical staff member who was treating him in a hospital emergency room in 2024, and spreading false information by claiming that he had sexual relations with Mr. B. Mr. A was accused of taking long-term flu medication. As a side effect, he showed strange behavior and was admitted to the emergency room, but he denied the charges, saying he had no recollection of what happened at the time. Even if there was physical contact, it is argued that this was not an act done with sexual intent. The prosecution determined that Mr. A was mentally and physically impaired due to side effects of the drug. This is because Mr. A underwent a drug test because he showed abnormal behavior before visiting the emergency room, and it was confirmed that the medication he was taking could cause abnormal behavior, self-harm, and confusion. In addition, it was suspected that Mr. A was in a normal state of mind due to his unreasonable behavior of molesting a stranger and making sexual comments in front of many people, and considering that Mr. A had no history of sexual crimes, it was determined that he did not have the ability to discriminate between objects or make a decision due to the side effects of the medication. Choi Yong-hwan, who represented Mr. A, Attorney Daeryun of the Law Firm explained, "Even if the alleged facts meet the requirements for a crime, if there are grounds that constitute a crime under the law, a 'not guilty' disposition, which is a type of non-indictment, is issued. Based on medical records, etc., we were able to obtain a decision not to indict by proving that Mr. A was in a state of mental and physical loss at the time." Reporter Jeong Cheol-wook[View full article] A man in his 40s was not indicted on charges of molesting a medical staff… Loss of mind and body due to drug side effects (link)

Daeryun Law Firm announced on the 2nd that it successfully completed the '2026 Compliance Management and Sustainability Management ISO·ESG·CP Integrated Workshop' co-hosted with the Korea Compliance Institute (KCI). This workshop, held at the FKI Tower Conference Center in Yeouido, Seoul on the 30th of last month, was designed to examine the core compliance management and ESG strategies that companies must have in a rapidly changing internal and external management environment. The event was held simultaneously online and offline, and legal and compliance officers and practitioners from each company attended and filled the room. The workshop consisted of practical programs such as ESG management strategy and fair trade risk management. Among these, in the fair trade compliance session, Attorney Gye-Jun Son of Daeryun Corporate Law Group presented topics directly related to practice, such as ▲Major issues of the 2026 Fair Trade Act ▲Types of unfair trade practices ▲Subcontract transaction risk management. Attorney Son first cited 'strengthening digital forensics-based investigations' and 'large-scale investigation team' as the Fair Trade Commission's latest field investigation trends and presented systematic response tips. He said, "Recent investigations have involved large-scale manpower. “The trend is to secure digital data,” he said, adding, “We must not only accompany investigative officials at all times, but also have the company’s IT experts present to prevent infringement of rights during the forensic process and establish a system to immediately seek assistance from lawyers in uncertain matters.” He also followed up with suggestions on risk management measures for each stage of subcontracting transactions. Attorney Son pointed out legal issues that may arise at each stage, from contract conclusion to payment, and warned of the dangers of following business practices. He added, "The Subcontracting Act has many prohibitive provisions in principle and is structured in such a way that the company must bear the burden of proving justifiable reasons. Since it is not easy to claim that transaction practices with partners do not violate the law, it is essential to make efforts to improve transaction practices themselves by strengthening internal training and regularizing prior monitoring through external experts." In addition, ESG added. Presentations on government-supported business strategies and ISO 37001/37301 revision response guides followed, and at the end of the event, the '2025 Compliance Management Leaders Awards' awards ceremony was held to discover excellent companies that contributed to establishing a compliance culture. At the awards ceremony on this day, HK InnoN was honored with the grand prize, and Korea South-East Power and GS Retail received the grand prize and excellence award, respectively, and were selected as exemplary examples of compliance management. Daeryun Choi Yi-sun, CEO of Management and AI and Compliance Department Head, said, "Starting with this workshop, Daeryun will strengthen its all-round partnership encompassing law and compliance so that companies can continue to grow beyond complex regulations and continue to grow sustainably." Eunhye Lee (zhses3@joseilbo.com)[View full article] Tax Ilbo - Daeryun, 2026 Compliance/ESG Workshop Successfully Completed... “Sharing corporate risk response strategies” (link) Sejeong Ilbo - Daeryun Law Firm successfully completes workshop focusing on corporate risk response strategy ‘Compliance/ESG’ (Go here) International News - Daeryun successfully completes 2026 Compliance and ESG Workshop... “Sharing corporate risk response strategies” (link)

Claim for damages against parents dismissed... The victim's family submits an appeal. The court ruled that the parents of Choi Won-jong (25), the 'Bundang knife rampage' who killed 14 people, cannot be held responsible. According to the legal community on the 30th, the 3rd Civil Affairs Division of the Seongnam Branch of the Suwon District Court ruled in favor of some of the plaintiffs in the lawsuit for damages filed by the victims' family of the 'Bundang knife rampage incident' against the assailant Choi Won-jong and his parents on the 16th. The court ruled in favor of some of the plaintiffs. It was determined that Choi should pay 880 million won in compensation to the bereaved family, but all claims for damages filed by the bereaved family against Choi's parents were dismissed on the grounds that "if the parents took their own actions, they cannot be held responsible for crimes using unpredictable means," the court said. "There is no evidence to suggest that Choi's parents violated their duty of supervision," and "in light of the fact that Choi left home immediately after becoming an adult and has ignored the family's medical advice and care, the family He explained, “It seems that it would have been very difficult to get Mr. Choi, who had become independent, to receive medical treatment or take medication again.” In terms of the foreseeability of the crime, he also said, “The period of time that Mr. Choi and his parents lived together just before the crime was only two days, and the delusion that Mr. Choi mentioned at the time was also far from threatening or harming anyone, with the intention of ‘being harmed by stalking by a large organization.’” In addition, although Mr. Choi has a mental history, he has no criminal or investigative experience. Considering the fact that Choi's parents did not harm others or used violent words or actions, it was judged that it would have been difficult for the parents to predict Choi's actions. Daeryun Law Firm, which represented Choi's parents, explained, "The Supreme Court precedent states that 'supervisory duty' does not mean a general obligation to completely control the behavior of a mentally ill person and prevent all consequences of that behavior, but should be interpreted within a reasonably limited scope." He added, “It appears that the court has reflected the existing precedent that liability must be held by comprehensively considering all circumstances, including kinship, cohabitation, level of daily contact, and whether the person has ever committed an act of harm to others in the past.” The victim’s family reportedly submitted an appeal on the 29th. Reporter Kim Mi-ji unknown@kyeonggi.com[View full article] Court dismisses responsibility for compensation of Choi Won-jong's parents for 'Bundang knife rampage'... “An unpredictable crime” (Shortcut)

Establishing a bridgehead for legal advice in mainland China - Daeryun “Providing practical legal solutions by linking professional groups optimized for the Chinese market” Daeryun Law Firm signed a business agreement (MOU) with China’s Hengdu Law Firm and announced on the 2nd that it will establish a cross-border legal service cooperation system between Korea and China in earnest. The business agreement signing ceremony was held virtually at Daeryun’s Gangnam branch office on the 13th of last month and was attended by Daeryun CEO Kim Kuk-il and Yoon Kyeong-won. Attorney, consultant Jang Jin-er, Hengdu Law Firm's managing representative Duan Lihong, attorney Kyeong-hwa Choi, and law clerk Lai Hauchi attended. Hengdu Law Firm is a large law firm headquartered in Beijing, China, and has extensive advisory experience in various industries, including intellectual property rights, corporate law, finance, real estate, energy, manufacturing, and international transactions. Its strength lies in systematic organizational operation based on professional personnel familiar with mainland Chinese legal practice. In addition, it has consistently received high ratings from global legal rating agencies such as Chambers, ALB, and LEGALBAND, and has established a solid position in the Chinese legal market. Through this MOU, the two companies will ▲ provide local legal and regulatory advice to Korean companies entering China ▲ legal support for Chinese companies' investments and business operations in Korea ▲ advise on M&A and investment structures between Korea and China ▲ jointly respond to international disputes and commercial litigation ▲ establish a customized cross-border advisory system for each industry, including the AI field We plan to cooperate closely in various areas. Duan Lihong, managing director of the Hongdu law firm, said, “It is meaningful to cooperate with Daeryun, a large law firm representing Korea. We look forward to providing practical legal results to both Korean and Chinese companies by combining the expertise and networks of both companies.” Kim Guk-il, CEO of Daeryun Law Firm, said, “Collaboration with a Hendu law firm with high trust and competitiveness in China is an important milestone in Daeryun’s global strategy,” adding, “Daeryun’s professional group and Hendu’s “We will provide legal services optimized for the Chinese market by combining local practical capabilities,” he said. Meanwhile, Daeryun is strengthening its global legal service system by expanding its cooperation network with law firms and professional organizations in major countries such as the United States, Japan, and Vietnam. We plan to continue to provide legal solutions optimized for the company's overseas business environment through strategic cooperation with local top-level partners. Reporter Cheon Ju-young (young1997@mydaily.co.kr)[View full article] Daeryun signs MOU with Chinese law firm...Strengthening cross-border legal cooperation between Korea and China (Click here)

Daeryun Law Firm announced on the 30th that it successfully completed a seminar on the theme of ‘Artificial Intelligence (AI) Basic Law-Corporate Response Strategy’. This seminar, held on the 29th, was held jointly with the Korea Artificial Intelligence Association. It was prepared to examine changes in the regulatory environment that companies will face in the wake of the Basic Act on AI, which will be implemented from the end of this month, and to present practical response strategies. The event, which was held online and offline, was attended by people from all walks of life, including major domestic and foreign conglomerates representing each industry such as energy, manufacturing, and distribution, as well as officials from national research institutes. Attorney Yi-seon Choi, who made the first presentation, explained the system and legislative purpose of the Basic Act on AI under the topic of ‘Basic Act on Artificial Intelligence, a mine or a shield?’ Attorney Choi analyzed, “Unlike the EU AI Act, Korea’s AI Basic Act does not prohibit the use of specific artificial intelligence in principle,” and “It is a structure that supports industrial growth and imposes management responsibility only for areas with a large social impact.” He then emphasized, “AI compliance is not a regulation, but can be a practical shield to protect companies in the event of future accidents or disputes.” Attorney Nam Kwon-yul pointed out the ‘differential regulatory system’ of the AI ​​Basic Act. He explained, “The AI ​​Basic Act varies the intensity of regulation depending on the impact of artificial intelligence, and specifically imposes transparency, safety, and accountability obligations on high-impact AI.” He also said, “The starting point of risk management is for a company to clearly distinguish whether it is a ‘developer’ or a ‘user operator’, or a combination of both statuses.” In addition, “User operators that are in direct contact with users must focus on securing ‘transparency’ to inform the fact that AI is being used, and developers who build systems must focus on ‘business operator responsibilities’ such as the risk management system.” He added, “In particular, items 1 to 3 among the business responsibilities must be “User operators are also considered to have implemented this, thus relieving the burden of overlapping regulations,” he added. At the same time, he emphasized, “Legal response in the AI ​​era is a matter of insight to distinguish which position and responsibility each person takes on,” and added, “Lawyers from Daeryun Law Firm will share the burden regarding new risks.” In the last session, attorney Seo-Hyung Lee explained from a practical perspective how companies should check and fulfill each obligation under the topic of ‘Practical response plan for companies under the AI ​​Basic Act.’ In this process, he used high-impact AI as an example and emphasized that its relevance should be judged based on the context in which it is used, rather than a specific technology or model type. Regarding the transparency obligation, he pointed out that advance notice of AI use and display of results should not be limited to formal measures, and should be structurally reflected from the service design stage so that users can actually recognize it. Next, lawyer Lee said, “Responding to the basic AI law is not a matter of declarative compliance, but is a process of classifying application obligations based on whether high-impact, generative, or high-performance AI is high-impact, generative, and high-performance AI and reflecting this in the company’s decision-making and operating structure.” He added, “These standards are applied throughout the development, operation, and legal stages.” “It is important to have a system that can be continuously inspected and reviewed,” said Kim Kuk-il, CEO of Daeryun. “This seminar was an opportunity to pre-examine the regulatory environment and responsibility structure that companies will actually face after the implementation of the Basic AI Act. Daeryun will support companies’ practical regulatory response through integrated legal advice covering everything from high-impact artificial intelligence judgment to responsibility design, compliance establishment, and dispute response, centered on the AI and Data Intelligence Group.” Reporter Kwon Byeong-seok (bsk730@fnnews.com)[View full article] Financial News - Daeryun, AI Basic Law Response Strategy Seminar..."Inspection of High-Impact AI Regulation and Responsibility Structure" (Shortcut) Law Leader - “Intensive inspection of high-impact AI regulation and responsibility structure”... Daeryun successfully completes seminar on AI basic law response strategy (link)

Law "It is highly likely that the damage was inferred based on the circumstances after the fact... It is difficult to determine." A convenience store owner who was put on trial on charges of taking a drunk part-time worker to a hotel and sexually harassing her was found not guilty. The 12th Criminal Division of the Seoul Southern District Court found not guilty a man in his 40s, Mr. A, who was indicted on charges of quasi-forcible molestation under the Child and Adolescent Sexual Protection Act in December last year. Mr. A ran the convenience store he runs in October last year. After drinking with the victim, Mr. B, who was a part-time worker, he was accused of taking the drunk Mr. B to a hotel and molesting him by removing his clothes. Mr. A denied the charges. He claimed, “I took off the vomit-covered victim’s coat and top and bottom, but I did not intend to molest him.” Regarding the reason why he did not come out of the room for about 30 minutes, “Mr. B vomited on the hotel floor, so I asked the staff for understanding and tried to resolve the situation.” An explanation was given. The court found that Mr. A was not guilty. Considering the fact that the victim had no recollection of the situation at the time, it was believed that the possibility of inferring the damage in light of the post-mortem circumstances could not be ruled out. The court said, "There is suspicion that the molestation was committed as in the indictment, as the defendant's DNA was detected in the victim's underwear," but added, "As a result of checking the CCTV in the hotel lobby, while the defendant was supporting the victim, he put his arms around his shoulders or hugged him with both arms, and some parts of his body were raised. “It is possible that he touched the victim,” he ruled. He added, “Although the victim claimed to have been naked after waking up, it is difficult to determine molestation considering the fact that DNA was not detected inside the victim’s underwear.” Park Seong-dong, a lawyer at Daeryun Law Firm, who represented Mr. He said, “I was able to obtain a good result by faithfully explaining the situation at the time, where it was difficult to consider the person who committed the crime. #Accident #Actual harassment #Why is the store owner not guilty? Park Seok-ho (haitai2000@ikbc.co.kr)[View full article] Why is a convenience store owner in his 50s found not guilty after drinking with a part-timer and molesting her at a hotel? (Shortcut)

The Supreme Court ruled that if a medical institution that made the insurer bear the cost of medical care benefits through deception or other unfair methods goes out of business, not only is the relevant medical institution no longer able to carry out its business, but the object of the disposition itself has disappeared, so a business suspension cannot be imposed on the medical institution and a new medical institution opened by the same person after the closure (see Supreme Court ruling 2020du39365, pronounced on January 27, 2022). However, even in the above case, if substantial identity is recognized between the two health care institutions, such as the opening location of the newly opened health care institution being the same or located nearby the previous health care institution and using a similar name, the patient demand base formed during the operation of the previous health care institution being the same or similar, or the transfer of human and material resources as is, there is a possibility that business suspension may still be considered possible for the newly opened health care institution by the operator who closed down the wrongful billing health care institution. Therefore, based solely on the conclusion of the above Supreme Court decision, considerable caution is required in cases where the business closes after an on-site investigation and before the suspension of business, and then opens a practice nearby under the same or similar name, or maintains an operating form to the extent that it is misunderstood as a medical institution that is virtually identical in appearance. Meanwhile, if the Ministry of Health and Welfare's on-site investigation confirms unfair claims and a medical institution that is at risk of being subject to a business suspension closes its business and no longer operates the institution, the business suspension becomes ineffective as a means of sanction. It should be noted that in such cases, a fine may be imposed instead of a business suspension. Ultimately, if unfair claims are confirmed as a result of the Ministry of Health and Welfare's on-site investigation, it is difficult to avoid administrative action in any form, whether it is a business suspension or a fine. So, what if the business closes before the investigation after selecting the target for the field investigation? In this regard, the Ministry of Health and Welfare's notice regulations, revised on June 30, 2022, stipulate that if business suspension is judged to be ineffective as a sanction because a medical institution has closed down before the administrative disposition is finalized or the institution subject to the disposition does not exist due to a change in the personality of the representative in a medical institution opened by a corporation, a fine may be imposed in lieu of a business suspension ('a fine in lieu of a business suspension') ‘Applicability Standards’ Article 2, Paragraph 2 (c). Accordingly, according to the above revised notice, even before the administrative disposition is confirmed, for example, before the on-site investigation by the Ministry of Health and Welfare is conducted, if unfair claims are confirmed through on-site confirmation by the National Health Insurance Corporation and the medical institution is selected as a target for on-site investigation, the risk of fine imposition still exists even if the relevant medical institution closes its business and avoids business suspension. However, if a specific administrative investigation, such as an on-site confirmation by the National Health Insurance Corporation, has not been conducted on a nursing facility that closed before the Ministry of Health and Welfare conducted an on-site investigation, there are still significant questions as to what standards and grounds can be used to impose fines.[View full article] [Contribution] Legal risks in case of closure of a nursing home before and after a field investigation by the Ministry of Health and Welfare (Click here)

On the 22nd, the 'AI Basic Act', which will become the legal basis for the AI ​​(artificial intelligence) industry, came into effect. This bill contains at its core regulations on 'high-impact AI' that can have a significant impact on human life or basic rights. The safety and reliability of AI technology, which has so far remained in the realm of self-regulation, has now entered a phase where responsibility is required according to explicit regulations. These changes require AI business operators to have systematic compliance and risk management capabilities beyond technological competitiveness, and are expected to fundamentally reorganize the operating paradigm of the entire industry. First of all, 'transparency' must be secured so that users can clearly recognize whether AI is involved. This is basic work to build user trust by preventing situations where AI-generated information is mixed with human results and making the source transparent. Accordingly, high-impact AI or generative AI operators must notify the use of AI through terms and conditions before providing services, and attach identifiable marks such as watermarks to the results to indicate that they are AI products. In addition, companies with very large AI models must have a preemptive safety verification system. The bill stipulates that AI with a cumulative amount of calculations used for learning greater than 10 to the power of 26 FLOPs is subject to core management. This is a step higher than the EU AI Act's standard of 10 to the 25th FLOPs, and can be interpreted as an intention to build a preemptive risk management system that goes beyond existing models and encompasses the next generation of super AI that will emerge in the future. Currently, the LLM of major domestic companies does not meet this standard, so it is unlikely to be immediately classified as 'high-impact AI', but establishing governance in preparation for the future technological environment has become an unavoidable task. Additionally, a 'people-centered management system' must be established to complement the 'black box' problem, which is the opaque decision-making structure of AI. In order to clarify who is responsible for the results, business operators must have a system that can explain the algorithm's judgment criteria and data overview, and establish specific procedures that allow humans to immediately intervene and control in the event of a system error. Ultimately, in order to efficiently implement increasingly complex legal requirements, an integrated response strategy that penetrates the entire company's value chain is essential. Although the law has already been implemented, the 'one-year fine guidance period' set by the government to establish the system is a very valuable golden time for companies. This period is not simply a grace period to avoid punishment, but should be used as an optimal preparation period to secure actual legal stability and improve internal systems. Fortunately, the AI ​​Framework Act is substantially alleviating the burden of overlapping regulations on operators through the 'deemed implementation' system. If the AI ​​development business has already completed certain measures, the user using it is also considered to have fulfilled the corresponding obligation, or if it has faithfully complied with the obligations under individual laws such as the Digital Medical Products Act or the Credit Information Act, it is recognized as having fulfilled its obligations under this Act. Therefore, companies should use the given guidance period as a diagnostic tool to closely review whether their service falls into the high-impact AI category. At the same time, it will be necessary to establish a 'customized implementation strategy for each industry' to reduce the waste of duplicate responses by considering consistency with other laws and regulations. The driving force to spread the sails of innovation despite the strong waves of regulation ultimately depends on how precisely a company manages legal risks. Small and Medium Business Team[View full article] In the era of AI Basic Law, legal obligations and preemptive response strategies for high-impact AI (link)

Analysis of key issues such as pharmaceutical patents and SOP issues... Gong Daeryun, a practical application risk management method, said, “The rapidly changing pharmaceutical and bio environment... will become a ‘legal compass’ that helps companies grow.” Daeryun Law Firm announced on the 29th that it successfully completed the webinar (online seminar) ‘2025 Pharmaceutical and Bio Sector Settlement - Medical, Bio and Healthcare Group Seminar’. This webinar, held on the 28th at the Daeryun main office in Park One, Yeouido, Seoul, heated up the pharmaceutical and bio industry last year. It was prepared to conduct an in-depth analysis of heated patent disputes and personnel and labor issues and to find practical response strategies for companies in preparation for the rapidly changing regulatory environment. The webinar was broadcast live online on this day, and many people in charge and practitioners from related industries, including pharmaceutical companies, bio ventures, and healthcare companies, participated and showed great interest. The presenter was attorney Lee Il-hyung, head of the Daeryun Pharmaceutical Bio Healthcare Center. Attorney Lee, who holds a pharmacist's license, delivered practical implications by analyzing major precedents he personally worked on, such as the '13-valent pneumococcal vaccine ruling', based on his extensive experience in litigation in the medical and pharmaceutical field. "It is important to note that the court recognized the special nature of bio-processing and interpreted the scope of 'research and testing exception' broadly," he said. "As much of the legal uncertainty related to the production of semi-finished products has been resolved, companies can more stably and confidently pursue R&D and global cooperation using public technology. “It was an opportunity,” he explained. Attorney Lee then continued to make suggestions from a human resources and labor perspective on the issue of illegal dispatch, which is a chronic risk in the pharmaceutical industry. He focused on the relationship between the main contractor's obligation to comply with standard operating instructions (SOP) and whether illegal dispatch is established. He said, “In strictly regulated industries such as pharmaceutical and bio, it is reasonable to view requiring compliance with SOP as a legitimate exercise of quality control rights rather than command and order to personnel.” However, he advised, “If the SOP goes beyond the simple standard of results and specifically controls the work method, there is still a risk,” and “the management system must be thoroughly blocked from the main contractor’s direct work instructions and the management system must be reorganized so that the partner company operates as an organization with its own expertise rather than simply supplying manpower.” Lastly, practical countermeasures in line with changed laws, such as the Digital Medical Products Act that went into effect last year, were also shared. Attorney Lee emphasized, “The implementation of the Digital Medical Products Act is an opportunity to dominate new markets such as digital therapeutics through the use of real-world data (RWD),” and added, “Companies must proactively establish cybersecurity and quality management strategies in line with the changed certification system and create new business opportunities.” Daeryun CEO Kim Kook-il said, “The role of the law firm is to help companies focus on their core business without wavering in the rapidly changing pharmaceutical and bio regulatory environment.” He added, “Daeryun will continue to “We will not miss out on changing industry trends and faithfully fulfill our role as a legal compass for the company’s sustainable growth,” he said. Reporter Kim Jong-cheol (jckim99@sportsseoul.com)[View full article] Sports Seoul - “Opportunity to dominate new markets”… Daeryun successfully concludes ‘2025 Pharmaceutical/Bio Settlement’ webinar (Go here) Medipana - "SK Vasa-Pfizer patent dispute, ruling that almost shook domestic CMOs" (link) Medipana - Daeryun holds ‘2025 Pharmaceutical/Bio Settlement’ webinar on the 28th (Go here) Pharmacist Public Opinion - “Opportunity, not regulation”… Is the Digital Medical Products Act a game changer for pharmaceuticals and bio? (Shortcut) Daily Medi - Daeryun Law Firm successfully concludes ‘2025 Pharmaceutical/Bio Settlement Webinar’ (Go here)