Press Coverage

The suspect denies the charge, saying, "B's unexpected behavior disrupted the class atmosphere." Claiming, "It is acknowledged that there was a point of inappropriateness, but it cannot be said that his mental health was impaired." An English teacher who cursed and administered corporal punishment to an academy student was cleared of charges. On the 8th, the Gwangju District Prosecutors' Office decided not to indict Mr. A, a man in his 30s who was sent on charges of child abuse and defamation. Mr. A was in the academy classroom in March last year. He was accused of abusing middle school student B, calling him a 'mentally ill person', swearing at him, and hitting his palm about 100 times with an empty plastic bottle. The academy, which recognized the abuse after Mr. A left the company, filed a complaint and the investigation began. Mr. A admitted the facts themselves, but denied intentionality of the abuse. He said, "B's academic attitude was insincere, such as suddenly joking or acting unexpectedly during class," and "B's mother disciplined him. The prosecution accepted Mr. A's claim. It was determined that it was difficult to say that the suspect's words and actions caused damage to the child's body or amounted to abuse equivalent to abandonment or neglect. The prosecution explained, "It is acknowledged that the suspect's words and actions were inappropriate, but there is insufficient evidence to show that the child's mental health was impaired as a result, such as receiving psychological treatment." In addition, regarding the charge of defamation, "The suspect's He added, “It is difficult to acknowledge the intentionality of the statement as it was only a one-off, and the content is closer to an expression of subjective opinion rather than lowering the social evaluation of the child victim, so it is difficult to say that it stated the facts.” Attorney Kang Jeong-hoon of Daeryun Law Firm, who represented Mr. A, said, “In order for emotional abuse of a child to be recognized, the level of harm to mental health and development must be recognized beyond simply an act that may cause discomfort,” adding, “While the client honestly acknowledges the facts, the act in question must be recognized as disciplinary action.” He explained, "We were able to obtain a good result by legally proving that this was the purpose."[View full article] “You are a mental patient…” Why is the English teacher who insulted a first-year middle school student not prosecuted for child abuse? (Shortcut)

KT and LGU+ also file an administrative lawsuit against the Personal Information Protection Commission's fine disposition. Security incidents also occur... Keeping a close eye on the court results. The battle between SK Telecom (hereinafter referred to as SKT) and the Personal Information Protection Commission over the 134.8 billion won fine has entered a new phase. This is because SKT disobeyed the fine imposed on the USIM information leakage hacking incident and filed an administrative lawsuit. This lawsuit, which is the first dispute since the launch of CEO Jeong Jae-heon's regime, is expected to have a significant impact not only on the standards for calculating fines but also on the personal information liability structure of the telecommunications industry as a whole, depending on the court's judgment. According to the industry on the 20th, SKT filed an administrative lawsuit on the 19th to appeal the fine imposed by the Personal Information Protection Commission in relation to the USIM information leakage hacking incident. SKT explained the background of the lawsuit, saying, “We would like to receive a thorough judgment from the court regarding the appropriateness of the fine.” SKT had customer SIM information stolen due to a hacker attack in April last year. As a result, 26.96 million pieces of core information including phone numbers and subscriber identification keys (IMSI) were leaked. The Personal Information Commission imposed a fine of 134.791 billion won and a fine of 9.6 million won for the incident in August last year. This is the largest fine since the launch of the Personal Information Commission. At the time, Personal Information Commissioner Ko Hak-soo pointed out, “There were overall security vulnerabilities, and even though we were aware of this for a long time, we missed the opportunity to take action.” The issue was ‘transience’… The issue of whether the principle of proportionality is violated is whether the fine is excessive compared to the violation. The industry believes that SKT will bring to the fore the violation of the principle of proportionality in fines. The principle of proportionality is the principle that means for achieving administrative purposes must have a reasonable proportional relationship with the purpose and that no more sanctions than necessary should be imposed. In accordance with the revised Personal Information Protection Act, the Personal Information Protection Commission calculated a fine of 3% based on total sales, not sales directly related to illegal activities. In response, SKT is expected to argue that sanctions based on total sales are a measure that excessively expands the scope of responsibility, considering the nature of the incident caused by an external attack such as hacking. “There is no large-scale investment or secondary damage.” Legal dispute In a case where personal information is leaked, the business operator may dispute legal responsibility over whether it has fulfilled its obligations to ensure safety under the Personal Information Protection Act. However, in this lawsuit, SKT is focusing on the appropriateness of the fine rather than completely denying the violation of the safety measure obligation itself. The court is also likely to base its judgment on the appropriateness of the level of sanctions rather than the illegality itself. Ji-woon Jang, an attorney at Daeryun Law Firm, said, “SKT will emphasize that the accident occurred even though it implemented the protective measures required by the technology level and industry practices at the time,” and added, “It is likely to mention that it made large-scale security investments and system improvements after the accident and that no secondary damage occurred.” “Considering that the fine is excessive, the key issue will be whether the level of sanctions is appropriate for the act of violating the law.” The ruling is expected to spread throughout the telecommunications industry. The ruling is not limited to SKT and is expected to have an impact on the entire telecommunications industry. Currently, KT is facing a fine from the Personal Information Commission after the public-private joint investigation team concludes. LG U+ is currently under police investigation on charges of obstruction of official duties surrounding the disposal of hacked servers. In these cases, the company's response after the accident can also be a major factor in determining legal responsibility. If SKT wins, all or part of the fine will be canceled. Naturally, the Personal Information Commission's method of calculating the overall sales standard is also put on hold. In particular, if a partial cancellation or reduction ruling is issued, a standard may be proposed that the standard for calculating fines in personal information infringement and hacking cases should be more strictly considered. Conversely, if SKT loses, the method of calculating fines based on total sales applied by the Personal Information Commission will be recognized as justified by the judiciary. This may lead to an interpretation that broadly holds companies responsible for managing personal information protection regardless of whether or not they suffered hacking damage. In addition, it is highly likely that the intensity of regulation on large-scale personal information processing businesses, including telecommunications companies, will be further increased. There are observations that with the expansion of security investments in telecommunications companies, it will become inevitable to revise management strategies to reflect potential regulatory risks. One telecommunications industry official said, “This ruling will serve as a standard for measuring the extent to which fines based on total sales are tolerated by the judiciary,” adding, “It is highly likely that it will remain as a precedent that determines the direction of the telecommunications industry and the domestic personal information sanctions system as a whole.”[View full article] SKT CEO Jeong Jae-hyun refuses to pay a fine of KRW 134.8 billion... "A 3% fine on sales is severe" (Shortcut)

Winter is a season when one small spark can easily spread into a large fire. The risk of indoor fires is particularly high during this period when the use of heating appliances increases rapidly. In the case of an indoor fire, special caution is required as the worst outcome can be loss of life and it can also lead to criminal punishment and huge civil compensation claims. The legal issue in fire accidents lies in the degree of intent and negligence. According to Article 164 of the Criminal Act (Arson of existing buildings), a person who intentionally sets fire to an existing building shall be punished by imprisonment for life or more than three years. On the other hand, the crime of accidentally starting a fire (Article 170 of the Criminal Act) is subject to a fine of less than 15 million won. The problem arises in ambiguous situations. Even if there was no definite intention, the court applies the crime of arson if “a fire was neglected while knowing that it could start.” Additionally, if a fire is caused by professional negligence or gross negligence (nearly intentional negligence), the person is subject to imprisonment for up to 3 years or a fine of up to 20 million won under Article 171 of the Criminal Act. In particular, if it is recognized as a misfire, not only is it subject to criminal punishment, but also liability for damages under Article 750 of the Civil Act cannot be reduced in compensation according to the special provisions of the Act on Liability for Misfire, and you may have to pay a huge amount of compensation. Therefore, it is most important to prove that it was not a ‘premeditated crime’ from the early stages of the investigation. Attorney Kim Jong-seo of Daeryun Law Firm recently took charge of the case of Mr. A, a client who almost became an arsonist due to a moment of mistake. Mr. A was booked on charges of attempted arson of a Hyeonju building by lighting an eco-bag at his home on fire with a lighter while intoxicated. The police strongly argued for indictment, saying that Mr. A had a ‘definite intention’ to set the fire based on the fact that he lit the fire himself using a lighter. Accordingly, a defense strategy was developed based on objective evidence. First, the fact that Mr. A voluntarily called 119 immediately after lighting the fire, legally argued that this constitutes an attempted surrender and arrest under the law. In addition, he suffered mental pain due to the death of a family member, and medical records proved that he was mentally and physically weak at the time of the incident. In addition, photos from the scene proved that the fire only caused some scorching of the eco bag and wallpaper and did not pose a public risk. As a result, the prosecution issued a suspended indictment conditional on completion of training to prevent recidivism, and the client was able to avoid the risk of becoming a criminal record and protect his life as a social worker. Attorney Kim Jong-seo of the Daeryun Law Firm said, "Immediately after a fire, there is no situation and there are many cases in which statements against oneself are made, but even a single statement can greatly change the level of punishment and the outcome of liability for compensation." He emphasized, “Only by establishing a response strategy that lowers the degree of negligence can we avoid the double whammy of criminal punishment and civil litigation.” Global Epic CP Lee Soo-hwan / lsh@globalepic.co.kr Winter fire accidents increase rapidly... There is only one slight difference between a ‘true story’ and an ‘arson’ (link)

Kim In-won, Head of Daeryun Law Firm's Criminal Investigation Group, As the police investigation into the illegal pornography distribution site 'AVMOV' has recently begun in earnest, awareness of digital sex crimes is growing. In particular, with the news that the police confiscated the server and launched a large-scale investigation, even simple viewers are trembling with fear as they do not know when the police will arrive. On the 20th, we had a phone interview with Kim In-won, head of the criminal group at Daeryun Law Firm, to hear about legal matters related to the distribution and viewing of pornography. Group leader Kim was appointed as a prosecutor at the Incheon District Prosecutors' Office and served as the chief prosecutor at the Seoul Central District Prosecutors' Office and the Seoul Northern District Prosecutors' Office, investigating sex crimes, special and financial cases for over 30 years. He joined Daeryun in May 2022. The following is a Q&A with Group Chairman Kim. - The N Room incident caused public outrage and punishment was strengthened. Nevertheless, why do digital sex crimes like AVMOV not disappear? “The biggest cause is blind faith in anonymity and distorted profit structure. Criminals have the mistaken belief that they are safe if they hide behind technical barriers such as bypassing overseas servers and paying with virtual currency. There is still a market structure that makes money by distributing provocative videos, and I think the fact that users can easily access it and the complacent perception that it is not a big crime are also contributing to maintaining the demand for crime.” - ‘If you pay with coins, a record is maintained. There are many people who believe that it will not be left behind. "Major domestic and international coin exchanges are obliged to provide subscriber information upon requests for cooperation from investigative agencies. Due to the nature of blockchain, fund flows are permanently recorded and tracked to the end. As soon as the operator's wallet address is identified, it is only a matter of time before the identity of all members who sent coins there is revealed." - If you claim that you watched it thinking it was a legal adult content and did not know it was a crime video. "It is difficult to clear the suspicion simply by subjectively stating that you did not know. For example, objective circumstantial evidence must be comprehensively considered, such as the path by which the site was accessed, whether the title or thumbnail of the video implied illegality, and the viewing time. If illegality is clearly revealed in the file name or thumbnail, scientific proof such as access log analysis is necessary to refute the illegality." - Punishment for downloading, possessing or redistributing illegal videos beyond viewing. The level of crime is: "Possession and storage are more serious crimes than viewing. This is because it carries the risk of being viewed again and distributed at any time. Furthermore, if you re-distribute it, you can be punished at almost the same level as the person who first distributed it. In particular, if you distribute child and adolescent sexual exploitation material, you can be sentenced to more than 3 years in prison, so it is highly likely that even a first-time offender will be sentenced to prison without probation." - Asking to upload a high-level video or mocking the victim. Will users who leave comments be subject to different punishments than those who simply watched? "Any act of encouraging a crime or ridiculing the victim through comments beyond simple viewing is accepted by investigative agencies and courts as strong evidence of active participation in a crime. Legally, a charge of aiding and abetting the spreader's crime may be applied, and if a specific video is requested, it may be interpreted as the domain of an educator or a co-principal. Additionally, if you continue to participate within the site through comments that specify and ridicule the victim, you may be subject to defamation or defamation under the Information and Communications Network Act. Additional charges of insult are applied under the Criminal Act, so it is highly likely that a much heavier sentence will be imposed than that of a simple viewer." Reporter Baek Jae-hyun (itbrian@newsis.com)[View full article] “We don’t use the ‘I didn’t know’ excuse… We need to change the complacent perception of digital sex crimes” (link)

Daeryun Law Firm announced on the 19th that it successfully completed a seminar on the theme of ‘Future Family Business Succession and Global Asset Management Strategy.’ This seminar, held at Daeryun Law Firm’s headquarters office in Park One, Yeouido, Seoul on the 16th, was held to examine rapidly changing inheritance law issues, such as the Constitutional Court’s recent unconstitutional decision regarding the reserve system and the so-called ‘Goo Hara Act’ that went into effect this month, and to present practical succession solutions to domestic and foreign asset owners and entrepreneurs. It was prepared. Sean Elgut, the founder and Washington DC representative of Veritas Collegiate Academy, a prestigious private school, and his wife, as well as global real estate and finance experts, showed great interest. The seminar consisted of four sessions in which legal, tax, accounting, and overseas legal experts participated. Chan-Woo Jeong, CEO of Daeryun Management, who took charge of the first session, analyzed practical changes resulting from the Constitutional Court's decision, such as the abolition of inheritance decentralization between siblings, under the theme of 'Korea's asset succession laws and precedent trends.' Representative Jeong emphasized, “As we live in an era where the wishes of the deceased are respected, elaborate preliminary planning that takes into account the red tape of wills and reasons for inheritance disqualification is essential.” In the following session, Dong-hoo Son, an attorney from New York, USA, presented on the topic of ‘American asset succession laws and cases.’ Attorney Son warned of the dangers of the difficult probate process that must be followed when holding assets in the United States. He presented asset management models that meet global standards, such as ‘Living Trust’ and ‘Establishment of LLC’, as key means to safely protect assets. In the last session, tax accountant Lee Joo-hee and accountant Park Soo-jin introduced professional tax saving strategies. Tax accountant Lee Joo-hee explained the risks of global asset taxation based on residency determination and measures to prevent double taxation. Accountant Park Soo-jin received a positive response by presenting a tax-saving simulation by share structure using the family business inheritance deduction and gift tax special taxation system with a maximum limit of KRW 60 billion. Kim Kuk-il, CEO of Daeryun Management, said, “This seminar was an opportunity to showcase Daeryun’s unique integrated solution encompassing domestic law, U.S. state law, and complex international taxation.” He added, “We will continue to utilize our global network to provide various opportunities to solve entrepreneurs’ complex asset succession concerns in one stop.” Reporter Jeong Cheol-wook[View full article] Seoul Shinmun - Daeryun Law Firm successfully concludes seminar on ‘Future Family Business Succession and Global Asset Management’ (Go here) Roishu - Daeryun Law Firm successfully completed seminar on ‘Future Family Business Succession and Global Asset Management’ (Click here)

Protests postponed until local elections in June... Paying attention to the results of the first trial for tram traffic obstruction, the National Coalition for the Elimination of Discrimination against Persons with Disabilities (Jeon Jang-yeon) held a rally on the 19th to mark the 1,000th day of the subway propaganda campaign on the way to work and urged the Seoul Metropolitan Government to make a decision to guarantee the right to mobility for the disabled. He also hinted at the possibility of resuming protests, saying that if there is no policy change from the Seoul Metropolitan Government, “I will have no choice but to take the subway again.” Jeon Jang-yeon has temporarily suspended subway protests until the local elections in June following a policy meeting with Seoul mayoral candidates from the Democratic Party of Korea. On the morning of the 19th, Jeon Jang-yeon held an event called '1000 Days of Subway Propaganda on the way to work' at Hyehwa Station on Subway Line 4 in Jongno-gu, Seoul. Justice Party leader Kwon Young-guk, as well as officials from the Progressive Party and the Basic Income Party, also attended the event. Seoul Mayor Oh Se-hoon, who had previously been offered a meeting by Jeon Jang-yeon, did not attend. A performance of writing and attaching post-it notes was held immediately after the 1,000-day propaganda campaign began. Soon, more than 40 post-it notes were attached to the platform. The post-it notes included things like, ‘1,000 days have passed, 10,000 days have passed, and I won’t get tired until 100,000 days.’ ‘We are all mobility-disadvantaged or people who will be mobility-disadvantaged.’ Jeon Jang-yeon criticized the Seoul Metropolitan Government and Mayor Oh Se-hoon for ignoring the guarantee of actual rights by dismissing the mobility rights of the disabled as a matter of conflict. It was also made clear that if the Seoul Metropolitan Government does not change its policy, it may resume subway riding. Park Gyeong-seok, CEO of Jeon Jang-yeon, said, “If the (movement) rights that the city of Seoul is talking about are not actually guaranteed, we will have no choice but to take the subway again.” Jeon Jang-yeon has been carrying out propaganda campaigns demanding guaranteed mobility rights for the disabled on subway platforms during rush hour, using the International Day of Persons with Disabilities on December 2021 as an opportunity. As a result, trains were delayed for up to tens of minutes. There were about 4,500 inconvenience and complaint complaints filed with the Seoul Transportation Corporation last year alone. On this day, there was also friction with some citizens during the event. One man protested by shouting, “Oh, it’s so noisy,” and another man uttered an expletive. Jeon Jang-yeon has decided to temporarily suspend subway protests until the day of the June 3 local elections. This is while accepting the proposal to postpone protests and hold policy meetings by Democratic Party lawmaker Kim Young-bae, who announced his intention to run for mayor of Seoul. Investigation and trial are in progress... There is a high possibility of being guilty of 'obstruction of tram traffic'. Some predict that the result of the first trial verdict on charges of obstructing tram traffic following the subway demonstration by some activists of Jeon Jang-yeon will have an impact on the method of protests by Jeon Jang-yeon in the future. The police have received a number of complaints and accusations against Jeon Jang-yeon activists from the Seoul Transportation Corporation and civic groups, including obstruction of business and tram traffic, and are investigating. On the 29th, the results of the first trial on charges of obstructing tram traffic against two Jeon Jang-yeon activists will be announced. They were handed over to trial on charges of disrupting the smooth operation of trains during a propaganda campaign in April 2022 and April 2023. Experts predicted that there was a good chance that the court would find the Jeon Jang-yeon activists guilty of obstructing tram traffic. Kwak Joon-ho, a lawyer at Cheong Law Firm, said, "It will be difficult for the court to say no to obstruction, so there is a high possibility that a conviction will be found. However, we will try to minimize the sentence." Seok Sang-yeop, a lawyer at Ilo Law Firm, also said, "It is unlikely that a person will be found guilty when he or she obstructs traffic during a rally. However, when tram traffic is repeatedly and deliberately obstructed, as in this case, and citizens are harmed as a result, the possibility of a conviction is higher than in normal cases." At the same time, he said, "If the level of obstruction is to the extent of delaying the operation of the train, such as actually forcing the train door open or lying down on the tracks, then (the charge) is established." If a guilty verdict is found, propaganda campaigns within the station will be possible, but there are observations that it will be difficult to maintain the method of protest that actively delays the operation of the subway. In particular, it is predicted that if a guilty verdict is found, the investigative agency may conduct a more active investigation or even consider arresting the offender in the future. Nam Kwon-yul, an attorney at the Daeryun Law Firm, said, "These precedents effectively function as guidelines for investigative agencies and have the effect of maintaining a constant standard and direction for investigation and prosecution for similar protest actions." Reporter Park Jin-ho (zzino@mt.co.kr) Reporter Kim Seo-hyun (ssn3592@mt.co.kr)[View full article] Jeon Jang-yeon celebrates ‘1000 days of subway propaganda’… “If transportation rights are not guaranteed, I will ride again” (Shortcut)

Recently, the prosecution indicted about 50 people, including famous instructors so-called 'one-way instructors', officials of large entrance exam institutes, and current and former teachers. They are accused of providing money to teachers who have experience in writing CSAT or mock assessment questions and purchasing questions, or obtaining questions in advance of EBS textbooks before they are published and using them for private education content. The investigative authorities judged this to be a serious issue that undermined the fairness of the educational field, applied charges such as violation of the Anti-Corruption Act and obstruction of business, and sent those involved to trial. What is noteworthy in this case is that not only the teacher who received the money and the private education officials who provided it, but also the private education company stood before the law. This suggests that customary external cooperation or consulting contracts can become legal risks that can push the entire company into crisis. The Anti-Corruption Act was introduced to ensure fair performance of duties by public officials, but in corporate practice, problems often arise due to misunderstanding of its scope of application. ‘Public officials, etc.’ as defined by the law broadly includes not only public officials, but also faculty and staff of schools at all levels, including private schools, and executives and employees of school corporations and media companies. In other words, when a company enters into a contract with an external expert for the purposes of marketing, consulting, lectures, etc., if the other party is included in the list of 'public officials, etc.', the Anti-Corruption Act will apply without exception. From a company's point of view, the most fatal thing is the dual penalty provision. The Anti-Graft Act stipulates that fines or fines be imposed not only on the employee who commits a violation but also on the corporation to which he or she belongs. In this case as well, if it is acknowledged that an academy official provided money or valuables to a teacher in connection with work, it is difficult for the academy corporation to avoid punishment as well. In particular, a key issue in sentencing is whether there was organizational direction or assistance at the corporate level during the investigation process, or whether considerable attention and supervision was exercised to prevent violations. Therefore, companies must internalize the following principles in their compliance system from a risk management perspective. First, there is a need to make identity verification procedures mandatory for transaction partners. This means that when signing an advisory contract or requesting a lecture, a process must be in place to check in advance whether the other party is a ‘public official, etc.’ under the Anti-Graft Act. In particular, it must be clearly recognized that teachers at private schools, not public schools, and media personnel are also eligible, and if necessary, they must be requested to provide proof of prior approval from the head of the relevant institution. Next, it is necessary to establish an objective basis for calculating legitimate rights. The law recognizes as an exception the receipt of money or valuables based on legitimate authority. However, as in this case, paying an amount that far exceeds the normal market price or paying money in the name of consulting fees without specific service results is highly likely to be considered a bribe or illegal money or valuables. When paying for external services, companies must establish reasonable standards based on market unit prices and thoroughly verify whether the contract details match the actual work performed. The last important principle is the prohibition of using confidential and undisclosed information in the course of work. When a company pays a fee to obtain information from a public official, etc., if the information is classified as an official secret, this may not only violate the Anti-Corruption Act but also extend to crimes such as obstruction of business or breach of trust. Even if a legally legal contract has been concluded, if the actual information exchanged is undisclosed internal information obtained by the other party in the course of his or her job, this is considered an illegal act. Therefore, it is necessary to closely monitor the work progress of related departments where information is frequently collected, such as external cooperation or strategic planning, and constantly check whether the source and circumstances of information obtained by executives and employees are within legal boundaries. Compliance capabilities have now become a key indicator of a company's sustainability. Establishing a preemptive risk management system beyond passive responses to avoid the law is the surest way to protect corporate trust and secure competitiveness. It is a time when the entire organization, from management to working-level employees, needs to make efforts to increase legal sensitivity and make ethical management part of its constitution. Small Business Team[View full article] “Companies are also punished for employee mistakes”… What are the ways to avoid the ‘bilateral punishment’ anti-graft law? (Shortcut)

At the time of the investigation, he was unable to control his body and the hair test came back positive. "There are differences for each individual hair test... I cannot be certain that he took the drug on the given date." A man in his 30s who was put on trial on charges of taking Philopon was found not guilty in the first trial. The Wonju Branch of the Chuncheon District Court found Mr. A not guilty on charges of violating the Narcotic Drugs Control Act (Hyangjeong) in December of last year. Mr. A was found not guilty at his residence in March last year. He was suspected of taking Philopon. At the time, the police judged that the charge was clear, citing the fact that Mr. A showed abnormal behavior such as not being able to control his body or self-harming when he was arrested for a separate assault case, and that the National Institute of Forensic Science's hair analysis results tested positive for Philopon. Mr. A denied the charge. Although the substance could be detected in his hair due to his past history of drug use, he claimed that he had not taken the drug on the date specified in the indictment. “A detailed urine test conducted 10 days after the incident resulted in a negative response,” he countered, adding, “Considering the normal drug excretion period, if he had actually taken drugs, the urine test should have come back positive as well.” He also emphasized that the abnormal behavior at the time of arrest was a blackout side effect caused by consuming cold medicine, sleeping pills, and alcohol together due to extreme depression and stress. The court ruled in Mr. A’s favor. The court explained, "It is true that drug substances were detected in the defendant's hair, but since there are individual differences in hair tests, it is difficult to conclude from this alone that the drug was administered at the time stated in the indictment." The court then questioned the credibility of the statement of Mr. B, a housemate, who was the only direct evidence. The court said, "In addition to the fact that Mr. He added, "Considering that the urine test results were also negative, it is difficult to say that the charges have been proven beyond a reasonable doubt." Attorney Min-young Han of the law firm Daeryun, who represented Mr. A, said, "The prosecution indicted based only on the defendant's abnormal behavior and positive hair results, but impeached the indictment by scientifically analyzing the timing discrepancy in the urine test results." He said, “Being clear can lead to good results.”[View full article] "The test result was positive for hair..." Man in his 30s found not guilty on charges of using Philopon 'Why?' (Shortcut)

Daeryun Law Firm announced on the 16th that it has launched the 'Franchise Business Damage Relief Task Force (TF)' to respond to the rapidly increasing franchise business disputes. According to the 'Results of the 2025 Franchise Field Survey' released by the Fair Trade Commission, poor sales, unfair trading practices, and distrust of settlement methods were pointed out as the main reasons why franchise owners are considering terminating their contracts. In particular, focusing on restaurants and industries closely related to daily life, franchise headquarters and It has been found that there is an increasing number of cases where conflicts between store owners lead to structural problems. This TF was established to structurally analyze and systematically respond to disputes that repeatedly occur throughout the franchise business, such as refund of franchise fees, unclear settlement structure, designation of essential items, and raw and subsidiary material transaction issues. The TF is led by attorney Gye-jun Son, head of the Daeryun Corporate Legal Group. In addition, Attorney Shin Jong-soo, head of the Corporate Advisory Center of the Corporate Legal Group, joined and strengthened his expertise. Attorney Son is a former secretary of the Fair Trade Commission and has accumulated expertise in the field of franchise and fair trade by directly conducting deliberations and investigations on cases of violation of the Franchise Business Act and regular investigations of large-scale franchise headquarters. Attorney Shin has a lot of experience in responding to large-scale group disputes, such as the Timon and WeMakePrice incidents. In addition, labor lawyer In-tae Bang, lawyer Ji Min-hee, who has accumulated expertise in fair trade and corporate consulting, lawyer Jang Ji-woon, who served as managing director of a KOSDAQ-listed company, and lawyer Kim Dae-gil, who practiced compliance, contract, and financial accounting law at many companies, joined the task force. In addition, experts in accounting, tax, and labor have joined the task force. We provide a 'one-stop damage relief service' that goes beyond the review of legal principles and encompasses finance, accounting, and labor by providing a 'one-stop damage relief service' that encompasses finance, accounting, and labor by analyzing the settlement system of the franchise headquarters, calculating unpaid balances, and inspecting labor risks during the franchise operation process. Attorney Dae-Ryun Son Gye-Jun said, "Unfair acts taking advantage of the franchise headquarters' superior position are not simply violations of the law, but are directly related to the livelihood of store owners," and added, "We provide support and collective response from various angles so that store owners can receive actual damage relief. “We plan to carry out the procedures in parallel,” he said. Daeryun is currently preparing to operate a damage reporting center for franchise businesses, and plans to present effective solutions focused on protecting store owners through the damage reporting center in the future. Eunhye Lee (zhses3@joseilbo.com)[View full article] Tax Ilbo - Daeryun Law Firm Launches TF Dedicated to ‘Franchise Business Damage Relief’ (Click here) Law Leader - Spreading franchise business disputes... Daeryun Law Firm launches TF dedicated to franchise damage relief (Go here) Sejeong Ilbo - Daeryun Law Firm Launches TF Dedicated to Damage Relief for Franchise Businesses (Click here)

A threat was written along with the details of the purchase of a weapon... "I wrote it out of anger" Claim: "The characteristics of the office worker community must be taken into consideration... A man who posted a message saying he would kill a foreigner on an internet community was cleared of charges due to lack of evidence reaching the victim. The Seoul Central District Prosecutors' Office decided not to indict a man in his 30s, Mr. A, who was sent on charges of public intimidation in December of last year. In October of last year, Mr. A posted on the bulletin board of an anonymous office worker community, 'If you enter Korea, He was accused of posting a post titled 'Sending all Egyptians to the underworld', along with a purchase history of a Japanese sword and a baseball bat. Mr. A is known to have deleted the post a few hours after he wrote it. Mr. A completely denied the charges. He said, "At the time of writing, I was extorted of 10 million won worth of money by a local person during a business trip to Egypt and the goods were confiscated at customs, so I wrote this out of resentment," and "It was just an accidental expression of emotion, but I did not commit an actual crime." “I had no plan to commit it at all,” he claimed. The prosecution accepted Mr. A’s claim. Considering that the specific date and place of the crime were not specified, it was judged to be insufficient to admit that there was an intention to threaten. The prosecution explained, “In the case of the site where the article was posted, unrefined expressions abound behind anonymity,” adding, “The crime of intimidation is established only when the other party recognizes the meaning by notifying the harm.” He added, “The site in question is for office workers in Korea.” Considering that it is a space, there is insufficient evidence to say that the suspect's post reached the target Egyptian people," he added. Attorney Seo Bong-ha of Daeryun Law Firm, who represented Mr. A, said, "We sincerely explained that if the actor's words and actions are merely emotional swear words or temporary expressions of anger, the intent to threaten cannot be acknowledged. Since the public intimidation crime was implemented last March, we were able to obtain a good result by proving that the perception of illegality was weak." It was revealed. #incident #foreigner #murder #non-indictment Park Seok-ho (haitai2000@ikbc.co.kr)[View full article] “If you go to Korea, I will send Egyptians to the underworld”...Why is a man in his 30s not indicted for making public threats? (Shortcut)