Press Coverage

Daeryun Law Firm announced on the 28th that it has launched the ‘School Violence Response Group’, a dedicated organization that covers the entire process from the initial response to dispute resolution and psychological recovery stages of school violence incidents. Recently, school violence disputes are expanding beyond the School Violence Response Committee (School Violence Committee) into a ‘complex war’ combining administrative, criminal, and civil matters. According to data from the Ministry of Education, the number of administrative lawsuits filed against the school violence committee increased from 255 cases in 2021 to 628 cases in 2023, an increase of approximately 2.5 times in two years. As school violence disputes become more structurally complex, the need for a more systematic and professional response is increasing. In line with this trend, Daeryun's School Violence Response Group operates a ‘one-stop support system’ that goes beyond simple legal assistance and connects professional infrastructure. In addition to analyzing evidence through the digital forensics center, we plan to organically provide psychological recovery support through professional counselors and personal protection services using security personnel to take responsibility for students' safe return to daily life. The group leader will be Cho Young-sam, a former judge of the juvenile division of the Chuncheon District Court. Attorney Cho heard many cases of juvenile protection and juvenile punishment while serving as a judge, and is an expert who understands the flow of juvenile justice practice. Attorney Gyu-seok Park, a former prosecutor, also joined the group. Attorney Park is in charge of special crimes and juvenile cases at the Chungju Branch of the Cheongju District Prosecutors' Office, and has handled major issues and investigative work in the process of converting school violence cases into criminal procedures. While working at the Gwangju Metropolitan Office of Education, Attorney Eun-jeong Na served as a working-level member of the school violence countermeasures committee and student disciplinary coordinator, and gained practical experience in overall procedures and disciplinary and protective measures at the education office level. Attorney Dae-won Kim, a lawyer specializing in school violence registered with the Korean Bar Association, He is serving as a member of the school violence response deliberation committee of the Incheon Metropolitan City Southern Office of Education, and has in-depth practical capabilities in the school violence committee deliberation structure and judgment standards. Management CEO Kim Kuk-il said, “School violence cases are high-level disputes in which juvenile justice, education administration, and investigative procedures operate simultaneously,” and added, “Daeryun has continuously advanced its response system based on professional manpower, practical experience, and infrastructure.” He then emphasized, “Through the school violence response group with a one-stop support system, we will present practical solutions so that students and families can return to a comfortable daily life.” Reporter Jin Ga-young news@lawissue.co.kr[View full article] Roishu - Daeryun launches ‘School Violence Response Group’… Establishment of a one-stop integrated response system (link) Seoul Shinmun - Daeryun Law Firm launches ‘School Violence Response Group’… Establishment of a one-stop response system (link)

Preemptively identify legal risks that may arise when entering the local market and provide practical solutions Daeryun “China and Vietnam are places where opportunities and risks conflict…an opportunity to prepare a specific strategy” Daeryun Law Firm and Korea-China Association announced on the 27th that they will hold a ‘Seminar on our companies’ legal issues and practical responses to China and Vietnam’ at FKI Tower in Yeouido, Seoul at 2 p.m. on the 11th of next month. This seminar will focus on rapidly changing business in China after the recent Korea-China summit. It was prepared to preemptively prepare for the Vietnamese market, which has established itself as a key point for the environment and global supply chain. Daeryun plans to examine legal risks that may arise when entering the local market and present practical solutions to help Korean companies make stable overseas investments. This seminar will be divided into two key sessions: China and Vietnam. In the first China session, attorney Daeryun Yoon Kyeong-won and Professor Park Seung-chan, president of the Korea-China Association and director of the China Management Research Institute, will appear as presenters. Attorney Yoon will share in-depth perspectives on ‘Types of legal issues and points to keep in mind when entering into China’, and Professor Park will share in-depth perspectives on ‘The recent Korea-China summit and our companies’ response.’ In the second Vietnam session, Attorney Daeryun Choi Young-jin will explain ‘Types of legal issues and points to keep in mind when entering into Vietnam’. In addition, KOTRA PM Choi Dong-cheol will take the podium to analyze and deliver local investment opportunities under the theme of ‘Vietnam investment support project, success stories, and introduction of investment opportunities.’ After all presentations, a Q&A session will be held to resolve practical difficulties of attendees and discuss response measures. Applications for participation can be made through the Daeryun official website. Anyone from a company considering or already entering China or Vietnam can apply. Daeryun Kim Kuk-il, CEO of Daeryun, said, “China and Vietnam are lands of infinite opportunity for our companies, but at the same time, they are places where unexpected legal disputes and risks exist. We hope that this seminar will help companies clearly understand the changing trade environment and establish specific strategies for successful local settlement.” Reporter Kim Hee-guk kukie@kookje.co.kr[View full article] Kukje Newspaper - ‘A place of new opportunity’… Daeryun holds China-Vietnam legal dispute and investment strategy seminar (Go here) Tax Ilbo - Daeryun holds seminar on legal issues and practical response in China and Vietnam (Go here)

The ISDS risk investigation team remains silent for 56 days due to differences of opinion between the ruling and opposition parties and out of session… Concerns about weakening negotiating power, burden of enforcement and gap… National Assembly Exit Strategy Dilemma As Coupang's American investors began International Investment Dispute (ISDS) procedures, the National Assembly's investigation into Coupang was placed in a fog from the beginning. As concerns grow that the political investigation could provide a pretext for international conflict during the 90-day cooling-off period, it is assessed that it has become unclear whether the government investigation will be launched in February. With both the enforcement of the investigation and the gap in response being pointed out as risks, how the National Assembly will design an exit strategy is emerging as a key task. According to the industry on the 23rd, Coupang's U.S. investment companies Greenox and Altimeter submitted a letter of intent for ISDS arbitration based on the Korea-U.S. Free Trade Agreement (FTA), claiming that they had suffered damages due to the Korean government's response following the Coupang personal information leak. ISDS is a system in which foreign investors seek a solution through international arbitration when they suffer losses due to the actions of the country in which they invested. The letter of intent to arbitrate is a preliminary procedure to inform the opposing government of the intention before filing formal arbitration. Following the submission of the letter of intention to arbitrate, the Korean government and U.S. investment companies are expected to enter into a 90-day cooling-off period of consultation, and the government investigation into Coupang is expected to virtually drift. The Democratic Party of Korea submitted a request for a government investigation to the National Assembly's Bill Division on December 31 last year, and the People Power Party submitted a request for a government investigation on the 8th. Due to the confrontation between the ruling and opposition parties over the leadership of the year-end and New Year's political situation and the internal circumstances of each party, an agreement on the agenda was in flux, and the report was made at the plenary session held on the 15th, 15 days after the Democratic Party's submission. The differences of opinion on the scope of the investigation were not narrowed, with the Democratic Party demanding an investigation focusing on Coupang, including information leaks and industrial accidents, and the People Power Party demanding an investigation into the overall personal information protection policy, including the three mobile communication companies and Temu and Ali. National Assembly blocked by external variables... With the National Assembly entering a non-session period ahead of the approval process for the plan that must confirm the scope of the investigation and witnesses due to concerns about counterattacks over 'retaliatory harassment', and external variables such as ISDS cooling-off period discussions overlapped, follow-up schedules, including the adoption of the government investigation plan, became difficult. Initially, it was expected that a full-scale investigation would be conducted after the opening of the extraordinary National Assembly in February, but as concerns over trade friction arose, some analysts say that the adoption of the plan itself has become uncertain. Experts point out that forcing a government investigation during the cooling-off period in the ISDS procedure could work at a disadvantage in the international arbitration arena. The cooling-off period is a time to seek an amicable agreement between the parties to the dispute, and if the level of pressure from the National Assembly increases during this period, there is a possibility that the investor side will take issue with this as a coercive measure. Dong-hoo Son, an American lawyer at SJKP, said, "During the cooling-off period, the government or the National Assembly pushing for an investigation or increasing pressure may be regarded as retaliatory harassment to force investors to submit. From the government's perspective, it has no choice but to face a dilemma between enforcing domestic law and preventing friction in trade, and may create an unfavorable situation for itself in an international trial. “It could lead to negative results,” he explained. Concerns about weakening the government’s negotiating power… 'Exit strategy' amid uncertainty As the confirmation of the official facts by the public-private joint investigation team was delayed, separate from the important government investigation, the government faced structural limitations in having to respond without the results of the domestic investigation or political agreement during the process of negotiation and explanation with American investment companies. Although 42 days have passed since the investigation team was officially launched on December 13 last year, there has still been no official announcement of investigation results. It has been 56 days since the incident occurred (November 29). It is pointed out that the situation in which the government has to respond to international disputes without clear confirmation of facts is weakening the government's negotiating power. Lee Jeong-hoon, professor of economics at Chung-Ang University, said, "The delay in the investigation team's announcement is a factor that amplifies market uncertainty," and predicted, "Investor anxiety arising from the absence of clear investigation results is likely to be passed on to the Korean government in future disputes." He continued, "If there is a situation where the investigation is delayed, efforts must be made to resolve uncertainty, such as clearly disclosing this." If the political foundation to support the legitimacy and transparency of the government's response is weakened, the risk may spread throughout the industry. This is because this dispute could increase uncertainty about overall cooperation in strategic industries between Korea and the United States, such as semiconductors and batteries. There are concerns that the gap in the National Assembly's response within the 90-day cooling-off period may go beyond the current issues and lead to a decline in external credibility and an increase in trade risks. Considering public opinion, it is not realistically easy to completely stop the National Assembly's response, so it is pointed out that the National Assembly must plan an exit strategy well. Professor Lee said, “Completely suspending the National Assembly’s functions just by filing for international arbitration is not in line with the legal sentiments of domestic victims and the public,” and suggested, “The National Assembly should continue its original role, including providing relief for damage, while maintaining a cool response that minimizes legal defects.” Reporter Go Hyeon-sol (sol@mt.co.kr)[View full article] International investment dispute ‘90-day cooling off period’… Coupang government investigation is in danger of being stranded (link)

“The most effective pressure” to delay taxation with retaliatory tariffs in France’s digital tax dispute… “A cool-headed diplomatic solution is needed.” Coupang’s U.S. investment company, venture capital (VC) Greenox and Altimeter, submitted a letter of intent to arbitrate an international investment dispute (ISDS) on the 22nd (local time) in opposition to the Korean government’s measures to regulate personal information leaks. They officially requested that the Office of the United States Trade Representative (USTR) investigate the Korean government and impose trade sanctions, including the imposition of tariffs. What U.S. investors presented as the basis for the USTR investigation is Article 301 of the Trade Act, so-called 'Super 301'. This is a legal means by which the United States can impose sanctions, such as retaliatory tariffs, on trading partners' unfair trade practices through presidential authority, and has been used as a core basis for major trade disputes in the past. Article 301 of the Trade Act was a major instrument of trade policy during the Trump administration. In 2018, the United States initiated a Section 301 investigation and imposed retaliatory tariffs on Chinese products due to China's infringement of intellectual property rights. This served as a means not only to resolve the U.S. trade deficit but also to demand system changes in other countries. In 2019, tariffs were imposed on aircraft and wine in the European Union (EU) due to subsidy payments to Airbus. The industry generally analyzes that this issue has a similar structure to the ‘French Digital Service Tax (DST) dispute’ in 2019. At the time, when France imposed taxes on American IT companies, USTR considered it an act of discrimination and opened an investigation. Afterwards, they announced the imposition of tariffs on French champagne, etc. and brought about a postponement of taxation. Coupang investment companies also define the Korean government's measures as 'discrimination against American companies', so the USTR's judgment in the future is drawing attention. Experts advise that we should keep in mind the possibility that this incident will spread beyond the individual Coupang issue and spread to Korea's major industries as a whole. Dong-hoo Son, an American lawyer at SJKP, said, “The essence of Article 301 is to find the most effective point of pressure to bring about policy changes in the other country’s government,” and analyzed, “It is a sufficiently realistic scenario for Korean semiconductors or automobiles to be placed on the retaliation list, as was the case in France.” He went on to say, "Article 301 has a strong tendency to be a political sword, and ISDS can be said to be a legal shield, but going through both procedures at the same time appears to be a diversionary operation." He added, "I am concerned that the risk of retaliation and astronomical compensation will act as a psychological and political binding force on policymakers." It is also pointed out that the structural specificity of Korea's data management system could become an issue in this dispute. Songcheon Moon, professor emeritus at KAIST Graduate School of Business, known as a world-renowned scholar on cyber DB security and the first national doctor of computer science, pointed out, “The U.S. claim is based on self-defense, and from their point of view, it is legal and reasonable.” Professor Moon advised, "The government will have to sufficiently prove that the weight and severity of damage from personal information leaks due to system differences between the two countries are different. The United States does not have a resident registration number, but Korea has a structure that has a lot of food for hackers due to the 'absolute ring' resident registration number." There are also voices calling for focusing on diplomatic solutions rather than overly interpreting the issue. Lee Jeong-hee, a professor of economics at Chung-Ang University, expressed caution, saying, "There has always been a trade controversy about foreign companies being disadvantaged, but in practical terms, there are not many cases where trade has become a major problem due to one specific company. It remains to be seen whether the U.S. government will actually take action." He emphasized, “We must continue to make people understand that we are not trying to diplomatically disadvantage a specific company, but rather hold them responsible for domestic damage.” Reporter Hwang Jeong-won (jwhwang@mt.co.kr)[View full article] France also suffered... The power of ‘Super 301 trillion’ summoned by Coupang (link)

'target regulation' claim… As a task to prove proportionality"We need to clear up the misconception that certain companies are disadvantaged." US investment companies are involved in an international investment dispute over the government's response following Coupang's large-scale personal information leak.(ISDS)and trade retaliation(trade law 301article) I took out the cards at the same time.. The investigation by the government and the National Assembly went beyond its essence. 'target regulation'This is their argument.. As the possibility that issues surrounding individual companies escalate into trade risks for the nation's core industries as a whole is emerging, 'laws and principles'The government, which has emphasized 'Proportionality of regulations'I went to the test where I had to prove that.23According to the Ministry of Justice and the industry, Coupang's U.S. investments, Greenox and Altimeter, 22Day(local time) against the Korean government ISDS Submitted a letter of intent to arbitrate. They say that the response of the Korean government and the National Assembly after Coupang's personal information leak incident was the Korea-U.S. Free Trade Agreement.(FTA)consultation 'Obligation to be treated fairly and equitably' He predicted billions of dollars in damages for violating the law..At the same time, the U.S. Trade Representative(USTR)in trade law 301The level of pressure was increased by requesting an investigation based on the article.. This provision stipulates that the U.S. government can take retaliatory measures, such as tariffs, if it determines that there is unfair behavior against U.S. companies in foreign markets.. USTRAfter receiving the petition, 45Decide whether to initiate an investigation within 12 days.Investment companies argued that the government and National Assembly's response was intentional excessive regulation targeting specific foreign companies.. It has expanded beyond personal information leaks to overall management, including labor, finance, and customs. 'target regulation'It was put forward as the basis for. While the response of the Korean National Assembly and government resulted in billions of dollars in losses, it was also reported that the fact that no Coupang customer claiming financial damage has been confirmed to date has been raised as an issue..Ministry of Justice 'International Investment Dispute Response Team'The position is that a joint response system will be established to review and actively respond to legal issues.. It is expected that the government will argue that it was a strict response in accordance with laws and principles, considering the large impact of the personal information leak incident and the social responsibility of platform companies..The key issue is 'Proportionality of regulations'… "Proving the appropriateness between damage and sanctions is key." government sanctions 'Proportionality of regulations' It is expected that the key issue will be whether it was within the allowable range under international trade norms in light of the principles.. Son Dong-hoo SJKP American lawyer "ISDS The arbitral tribunal takes as its core criterion the principle of proportionality, which is the balance between the public interest purpose of regulation and harm to investors."said.At the same time, the investigation that began due to the personal information leak has expanded to cover the entire company, including labor, finance, and customs, and the possibility of trillion-level fines being imposed without the actual financial victims being identified is fair and equitable treatment under international law.(FET) It was pointed out that it could be an issue of violation of principles.. he is "An investigation that purges all areas of a company under the pretext of a specific incident may be viewed by investors as retaliatory harassment or a violation of reasonable expectations."as "This is ISDS It has the potential to be used as a decisive basis for proving the government's malice in an arbitral tribunal."was diagnosed.mudfish "The government will assert its preventive deterrence against market order disturbances and its own regulatory authority, but in international practice, large fines without specific damage proven are difficult to logically defend."saying "'Specificity of Damage'class 'sanctions level' How to prove the appropriateness of the relationship will determine the success or failure of the lawsuit."added.Shaking up industry and trade overall 'complex issue' injury… A diplomatic solution is urgently needed. This issue goes beyond the controversy over the level of sanctions against individual companies and goes beyond Korea's industrial policy and corporate regulation., Shaking up the overall trade strategy 'complex issue'There is a possibility that it may expand to. The analysis is that the government's regulatory judgment has shifted to a phase where it is intertwined with trade risks..Lawyer Son " ISDS Arbitration and USTR A strategy of conducting research in parallel is recommended to policy decision makers. 'Regulation chilling effect'can give"as "If enforcement of domestic law is enforced, the risk of retaliation and astronomical compensation that will follow acts as a practical psychological and political binding force on policy decisions."pointed out. And then "USTRretaliatory measures are not simply limited to the affected company's industry."as "In the case of Korea, semiconductors and automobiles (retribution) Being on the list is a possible scenario"explained.The problem is that the issue is spreading into an international dispute without sufficient investigation of the truth and political agreement domestically.. As the possibility of the government investigation becoming drifting increases, the stage of the dispute appears to be moving to the international sphere without strengthening internal logic and institutional arrangements..experts say 'Hitting a specific company'We suggest that diplomatic communication is urgent to resolve the misunderstanding and convince people that this measure is a legitimate enforcement of domestic law.. Lee Jeong-hee, professor of economics at Chung-Ang University, "There has always been a trade controversy about foreign companies being disadvantaged, but in practice, cases where trade between countries becomes a major problem due to a single specific company are rare."as "It remains to be seen whether the U.S. government will actually retaliate., at the government level 'The goal is not to disadvantage a specific company, but to hold it accountable for damage to domestic customers.'Diplomatic efforts to continue to make people understand that"He emphasized. Reporter Go Hyeon-sol (sol@mt.co.kr) [View full article] Fair regulation vs excessive pressure... Issues in ISDS/Article 301 ‘Coupang Incident’ (Shortcut)

[Anchor] Two American companies that are major shareholders of Coupang announced that they would initiate international investment dispute and ISDS arbitration procedures against the Korean government. After the Coupang incident, they claimed that American investors suffered losses due to discriminatory treatment by the Korean government. At the same time, they also requested the U.S. government to investigate Korea. Reporter Jeong Jae-woo reports. [Report] Coupang investment companies Greenox and Altimeter claimed that they received unfair discriminatory treatment in the letter of intent to arbitrate submitted to the Korean government. He claimed that the Korean government targeted Coupang to protect existing large corporations. It was written that Coupang, an American company, was severely punished, while Korean and Chinese companies were lightly punished. As a result, the stock price fell and American investors suffered losses, which was cited as the reason for filing the dispute. On the New York Exchange on the 22nd local time, the stock price of Coupang's headquarters fell by nearly 30% compared to before the information leak. However, analysis suggests that Coupang is unlikely to win the dispute based only on the decline in the stock price. This is because it is not easy to prove both that government regulations are unfair and that they are the cause of the decline in stock prices. [Lee Tae-ho/Former Vice Minister of Foreign Affairs/Advisor, Gwangjang Law Firm: “The general trend is to recognize the state’s legitimate regulatory authority quite broadly...”] A more powerful target is the U.S. government’s trade remedy investigation. On the same day, Coupang investors petitioned the U.S. Trade Representative to investigate the Korean government based on Article 301 of the Trade Act, and retaliatory tariffs were imposed. We directly requested measures such as retaliation. Considering our sensitive situation regarding tariffs and the Trump administration's tendency to use tariffs as a weapon, it is a burden that cannot be ignored. The U.S. Trade Representative must decide whether to initiate an investigation within 45 days of receipt, and the key is to persuade the U.S. government not to initiate an investigation. [Son Dong-hoo/American lawyer/law firm SJKP: "Given the Trump administration's protectionist tendencies and America-first stance, there is no scenario in which the investigation will lead to actual retaliatory measures. Quite realistic..."] Prime Minister Kim Min-seok, who is visiting the United States, met with members of the House of Representatives and explained that there is no discrimination against Coupang. This is Jeong Jae-woo of KBS News. Camera reporter: Ji Seon-ho/Video editor: Yoo Ji-young/Graphics: Kim Ji-hoon Jeong Jae-woo (jjw@kbs.co.kr)[View full article] ISDS with low odds of winning... The target is Super 301 trillion won? (Shortcut)

“If the shareholder class action lawsuit is won, the American investment company’s argument will lose its persuasiveness” National Pension Service invested 200 billion won in Coupang… As Coupang investors in the United States take issue with the Korean government's investigation and submit a letter of intent to arbitrate an International Investment Dispute (ISDS), the large-scale information leak appears to be turning into a commercial dispute. Accordingly, the outcome of the class action lawsuit filed by domestic and foreign Coupang investors has become more important than before. Although it is strictly a separate issue, it is intertwined in the sense that it proves the background and core of the losses suffered by investors. As a shareholder who invested more than 200 billion won in Coupang, attention is being paid to whether the National Pension Service will initiate a class action lawsuit. According to related industries on the 26th, Greenox and Altimeter, investment companies in Coupang, recently requested the Office of the U.S. Trade Representative (USTR) to investigate the Korean government's Coupang-related measures and take appropriate trade relief measures. The investment companies stated the reason, saying that investors suffered enormous losses as the Korean government launched an intensive investigation targeting Coupang after Coupang's personal information was leaked. In addition, the investment companies submitted an International Investment Dispute (ISDS) letter of intent to arbitrate to the Korean government to file an arbitration claim under the Korea-U.S. Free Trade Agreement (FTA). These investors said, "Prime Minister Kim Min-seok said in relation to law enforcement for Coupang's information leak case, 'With the same determination as when eradicating the mafia. ISDS is a legal remedy through which a foreign investor can claim compensation for damages from the government when an investment loss is incurred due to the actions of the government of the investment host country. If an agreement is not reached within a certain period of time after the letter of intent to arbitrate is submitted, a formal arbitration procedure is initiated. As the information leak incident has become a common problem, the importance of the outcome of the class action lawsuit filed by Coupang shareholders has become greater than before. The U.S. branch of Daeryun Law Firm SJKP announced last month that it would officially file a consumer class action lawsuit against Coupang Inc in the New York Federal Court. In addition, We the People Law Office also filed a class action lawsuit against Coupang Inc and its key executives, including Chairman Kim Beom-seok, in the U.S. District Court for the Western District of Washington on behalf of domestic shareholders this month. The class action lawsuit filed by shareholders and the ISDS are currently separated in terms of legal procedures, but the core point is 'shareholder damage'. Coupang shareholders who filed the class action claim that 'Coupang's Their position is that they suffered losses due to information security failures, and the U.S. headquarters also exercised actual management rights and are not free from responsibility. If they actually win, this means that the American investment company's claim that it suffered losses due to the Korean government's investigation will lose its persuasiveness. SKJP's U.S. attorney Dong-hoo Son said, "The class action lawsuit on behalf of the victims is aimed at relieving specific damages to individuals in accordance with private contract and tort law, and focuses on the company's compliance with security obligations and governance failures. He added, "ISDS aims to protect investors' property rights based on international law and examines whether the Korean government's administrative measures are discriminatory or harsh." He added, "If the company's security failure and gross negligence are clearly proven in the class action lawsuit and a large-scale compensation judgment is issued, it could be decisive evidence supporting the legitimacy of the fine imposed by the Korean government in the ISDS." As a result, attention will also be focused on whether the National Pension Service will participate in the lawsuit. It appears that the National Pension Service is also a stakeholder holding about 218.1 billion won worth of Coupang stocks as of the end of 2024. Lee Young-gi, a lawyer at We the People Law Firm, said, "In the case of the National Pension Service, it also revealed that it will exercise shareholder rights for ESG, which was advocated in the recent presidential work report." He added, "If pension funds such as the National Pension Service, which are institutional investors who have suffered great damage from the decline in Coupang's stock price, participate, it will be easy to prove the sharp decline in the stock price." did.joongjp@yna.co.krsijung@yna.co.kr[View full article] US Coupang investment company ISDS notice... Is the ‘national pension role theory’ emerging? (Shortcut)

Korean-Chinese companies enter the market and cooperate with investment advisory... Securing global market competitiveness beyond Asia - Daeryun “Daeryun, a model law firm with total legal services including AI technology, announced on the 23rd that it has signed an MOU (business agreement) with the Korean branch of Yingke Law Firm, China’s largest global law firm, and will strengthen legal support for Korean-Chinese companies and digital industry advice. At the signing ceremony held at Daeryun’s Seoul headquarters branch office on the 8th, Daeryun CEO Kuk-il Kim, attorney Kyung-won Yoon, and Jin-eol Jang attended the signing ceremony. Consultants and the representative attorney of Inker Law Firm's Korean office, LI In particular, it is recognized for its outstanding expertise in cutting-edge digital industries such as blockchain, AI (artificial intelligence), FinTech (fintech, financial technology), and semiconductor and energy trade. Through this MOU, Daeryun plans to provide integrated legal services to both Korean and Chinese companies seeking to expand into the two countries. We plan to cooperate in a variety of fields, including technology transfer advisory ▲international transaction and M&A legal advice ▲legal service cooperation in the semiconductor and energy trade fields. Lee Shin, representative attorney of Inker's Korea office, said, "By collaborating with Daeryun, a competent Korean law firm, we can provide more reliable Korean legal services to Chinese and Asian clients." Daeryun CEO Kim Kook-il said, "The partnership with Inker, which has a global network throughout China, will be a great help in expanding the scope of Daeryun's legal services throughout China and Asia. We will secure international competitiveness based on AI technology, online marketing, and Daeryun's own total legal service model." The system is continuously being expanded. Reporter Cheon Ju-young (young1997@mydaily.co.kr)[View full article] “Building a legal bridge between Korea and China”... Daeryun signs MOU with Chinese law firm Inker (Click here)

Daeryun Law Firm announced on the 23rd that it was selected as an excellent law firm in the field of trademark litigation at the 'Korea Law Firm Awards 2025' hosted by Asia Business Law Journal (ABLJ), a legal magazine in Asia. Every year, ABLJ, a leading legal media in the Asia-Pacific region headquartered in Hong Kong, conducts an in-depth survey of in-house lawyers, law firm lawyers, and legal experts around the world. It selects and announces excellent law firms that have achieved remarkable results in each field throughout the year. At this award, Daeryun was recognized for its expertise by winning in the trademark litigation category, which is the core of the intellectual property (IP) field. Daeryun has shown outstanding performance by securing excellent winning cases in the recently rapidly increasing number of trademark infringement disputes between companies and cases of violation of the Unfair Competition Prevention Act. As the background to its selection, ABLJ focused on the fact that Daeryun successfully led a difficult trademark dispute in which 'fair use by prior use' was an issue. ABLJ evaluated that “Daeryun reflected the prevailing practices of the market in legal principles and was recognized by the court for the business interests of previous users.” Daeryun Intellectual Property Group has formed a dedicated team led by IP field veterans such as Lee Da-woo, a former patent court judge, and Cho Min-woo, a patent attorney, to provide one-stop legal services ranging from trademark application and registration to trials and litigation. Based on this, we are evaluated as having successfully defended our clients' rights through strong legal action against the use of similar trademarks in industries where disputes are frequent, such as franchises and e-commerce. Daeryun CEO Kim Kuk-il said of the award, "This ABLJ award is the result of external recognition of the know-how and skills that Daeryun has steadily accumulated in the field of intellectual property rights," and added, "We will continue to do our best to provide the optimal legal solution for protecting intellectual property rights so that companies can focus on management with peace of mind." Eunhye Lee (zhses3@joseilbo.com)[View full article] Jose Ilbo - Daeryun, selected as an excellent law firm in the trademark litigation field at the ABLJ ‘2025 Korean Law Firm Awards’ (link) Roy Shu - Daeryun, selected as an excellent law firm in the trademark litigation field at the ABLJ ‘2025 Korean Law Firm Awards’ (Click here) Tax and Finance News - Daeryun, intellectual property rights litigation recognized by ABLJ... ‘2025 Korean Law Firm Awards’ Outstanding Law Firm (Go here) Sisa Journal - Daeryun Law Firm selected as an excellent law firm in the trademark litigation field at the ABLJ '2025 Korean Law Firm Awards' (Go here) KBC Gwangju Broadcasting - Daeryun, selected as an excellent law firm in the trademark litigation field at the ABLJ '2025 Korean Law Firm Awards' (Go here) Public News Agency - Daeryun Law Firm selected as an excellent law firm in the field of trademark litigation at the ABLJ ‘2025 Korean Law Firm Awards’ (Click here) Korea Economic Daily - Daeryun, selected as an excellent law firm in the trademark litigation field at the ABLJ ‘2025 Korean Law Firm Awards’ (Go here) Venture Square - Daeryun Law Firm selected by ABLJ for the 2025 Korean Law Firm Award in the Trademark Litigation Category (Click here) Money S - Daeryun, selected as an excellent law firm in trademark litigation at ABLJ's '2025 Korean Law Firm Awards' (Click here)

Now is the golden age of ‘Dujokku (Dubai chewy cookies)’. This dessert, which is a reinterpretation of Dubai chocolate and has a chewy texture by wrapping kadaif and pistachio in marshmallows, is gaining explosive popularity mainly on social media, causing a sell-out crisis. There has even been a strange phenomenon in which douchonku is made and sold not in cafes or bakeries, but in general restaurants such as sushi or soup restaurants that seem to have nothing to do with desserts. Recently, it is no exaggeration to say that the whole world is caught up in the doojokku craze, with young people holding open runs in front of blood donation centers after hearing that doojokku will be given to those who donate blood. In fact, if you look at second-hand trading platforms such as Carrot Market, you can see that the doojokku purchased at the store are being resold for a higher price or that there is a flood of purchase request posts saying, 'I'm looking for a doojokku.' Furthermore, many posts are found reselling ingredients needed to make dujokku, such as kadaif noodles and pistachios. It may have started with a light heart or to earn a small amount of pocket money, but the act of selling opened food in small pieces is not only prohibited by platforms such as Carrot due to concerns about hygiene, but also carries the risk of developing into legal problems. Food is a field directly related to the health and safety of the public, so legal regulations are very strict. First, according to Article 37, Paragraph 4 of the Food Sanitation Act, anyone who wishes to manufacture, process and sell food must report or register their business with the competent government office. Anyone who violates this and operates without reporting may be subject to imprisonment for up to 3 years or a fine of up to 30 million won in accordance with Article 97 of the same Act. There are also harsher punishment provisions. Article 4, Paragraph 7 of the Food Sanitation Act strictly prohibits the act of selling ‘products manufactured, processed, or distributed by persons other than business operators.’ If you violate this, you may be subject to severe punishment of up to 10 years in prison or a fine of up to 100 million won in accordance with Article 94 of the same Act. In other words, in principle, it is against the law to sell home-made dujoku without reporting the business or to arbitrarily divide and sell douchoku purchased at a store into small quantities. Of course, it is very rare for an individual to be immediately arrested and investigated for selling small quantities. If it is a first offense or the case is minor, administrative guidance or fines are often applied first. However, it should be noted that the surveillance network of investigative agencies has recently expanded beyond offline to online as well. The Ministry of Food and Drug Safety constantly monitors illegal advertisements online through its cyber investigation team. Carrot Market, a platform operator, is also aware of these risks and is taking crackdown measures through monitoring and prohibiting trade in food products directly processed and manufactured by individuals. In other words, even if someone does not report it, there is always the possibility of being caught up in the systematic surveillance and crackdown network. Therefore, if by chance you become the subject of an investigation by an investigative agency due to such a transaction, you should focus on proving that the act was unintentional and that business feasibility was significantly low rather than vaguely complaining of unfairness. In order to establish a violation of the Food Sanitation Act, there must be a business activity with the intention to continue and repeat, so it must be actively asserted that the number of sales was one-time or one-off or that there was virtually no actual profit. In addition, as an ordinary person, not a professional seller, you must explain with specific transaction details and circumstantial evidence that it was an accidental act due to legal grounds. Through this, efforts should be made to clear the charges at the investigation stage and prevent unfair punishment that may occur. ● Contributions by external writers may differ from the editorial direction of this paper. Gyeonggi Ilbo webmaster@kyeonggi.com[View full article] [Contribution] “We are dealing with Dujokku”… Can an inadvertent used transaction become a ‘crime’? (Shortcut)