Press Coverage

Daeryun Law Firm announced on the 18th that it will hold the '2026 Compliance Management/Sustainability Management ISO·ESG·CP Integrated Workshop' in collaboration with the Korea Compliance Institute (KCI). This workshop, which will be held at the Diamond Hall on the 3rd floor of the FKI Tower Conference Center in Yeouido, Seoul on January 30, 2026, will be held in order to preemptively inspect the company's core compliance and ESG strategies in response to the rapidly changing internal and external management environment. At this event, Daeryun will deliver an in-depth lecture dedicated to the CP (Compliance Program) session, which is the core of corporate legal affairs. Attorney Dae-ryun Son Gye-jun will be the speaker and will give presentations on topics such as analysis of key issues of the 2026 Fair Trade Act, risk management at each stage of subcontracting, and corporate practical response strategies. In addition, the workshop will feature a multifaceted program for sustainable management, such as the 2026 ESG government support project participation strategy and ISO 37001/37301 revision response guide. In addition, the 'Compliance & Ethics Awards' awards ceremony will be held to discover excellent companies that have contributed to establishing a culture of compliance. This workshop will be held for 200 people on a first-come, first-served basis both online and offline. Offline participants will be provided with lunch and souvenirs, and after the event, a networking session and prize drawing event will be held to exchange information between business executives. Applications for participation can be made through the official website of the Korea Compliance Agency. Daeryun Choi Yi-seon, CEO of Management and Head of AI and Compliance, said, "2026 will be an important turning point in which fair trade and ESG management determine the survival of companies. I hope that through this workshop, companies will be able to clearly understand issues of the revised Fair Trade Act and obtain clear solutions to practical difficulties such as subcontracting risks." Meanwhile, Daeryun has a corporate legal group. It provides comprehensive legal advice in areas related to corporate regulation, including collusion, subcontracting, and unfair trade practices. In addition, we provide one-stop support for advanced risk management solutions that combine legal expertise with the latest data technology through the ‘AI Compliance Center’ under the AI ​​and Data Intelligence Group led by Attorney Young-Gon Cho. Reporter Ga-Young Jin news@lawissue.co.kr[View full article] “Finding a solution for corporate survival”... Daeryun holds ESG·CP integrated workshop with KCI (Go here)

“Additional space is provided free of charge in response to tenant objections after signing the contract.” “It is difficult to see that there is intent… Fraud does not constitute a crime.” A landlord who was accused of tricking tenants into renting an unlicensed building and stealing tens of millions of won in deposits was cleared by the prosecution. According to the legal community on the 18th, the Uijeongbu District Prosecutors' Office decided not to indict Mr. A, a man in his 40s who was sent on charges of fraud on the 10th of last month. Mr. A, the landlord, last month In February, he signed a lease contract with tenant B for a warehouse building located in Gyeonggi-do and received a deposit of 50 million won. However, after signing the contract, Mr. B sued Mr. A, saying that he did not intentionally inform him that the building was an unlicensed and illegal building and that the actual area was smaller than the contracted area when he signed the contract. Mr. A completely denied the charges, saying, “When I purchased the building in 2022, I was not aware of the illegality because I was told by the previous owner that it had been used without problems for decades.” In addition, they argued that they did not intentionally deceive Mr. B because the district office's notification of the violating building was only made after the contract was signed in July 2024. The prosecution, which examined the case, decided that it was difficult to view Mr. A's actions as fraud. The prosecution said, “Not only did the complainant visit the site in person and check the building in detail before signing the contract, but when he raised an objection immediately after signing the contract saying that the actual area was small, the suspect immediately ordered the use of the additional space free of charge without rent. “I took action,” he said. If Mr. A had intentionally defrauded, there was no reason to provide additional area free of charge. Regarding the charge of deception related to illegal buildings, the prosecution said, “Considering that the timing of the correction order from the competent city hall is consistent with the suspect’s claim and that the building in question has been used without any problems before, it is difficult to say that the suspect entered into a contract with knowledge of the illegality.” Kim Ji-hee, lawyer at Daeryun Law Firm, who represents Mr. A, said, “For fraud to be established, deception is required.” “The intent of the act and defrauding must be proven,” he explained. “The client faithfully fulfilled his obligations, including making repairs at his own expense, and was able to get rid of the unfair charges by proving with objective evidence that he was not aware of the illegal building at the time of signing the contract.” Reporter Kim Mi-ji unknown@kyeonggi.com[View full article] They stole 50 million won by renting an unlicensed building... Building owner ‘not guilty’ (link)

<Anchor>Coupang reported this personal information leak to the U.S. Securities and Exchange Commission only four hours before the hearing. There are criticisms that the report was delayed to reassure American investors. The CEO of Coupang, who appeared at the hearing, said that although reporting was not mandatory, he made it public because of great interest. Reporter Seung-hoon Choi examined whether this claim was true. <Reporter> This is Coupang's public disclosure report disclosed to the SEC of the U.S. Securities and Exchange Commission at 6:13 am today (17th) our time. It was titled 'Significant Cybersecurity Incident' in the name of CEO Rogers. On the 18th of last month, up to 33 million customer names and phone numbers were reported. They were aware that personal information had been leaked, and wrote that Korean regulators were likely to impose financial penalties. CEO Rogers appeared at a hearing about four hours later and argued as follows. [Harold Rogers/CEO of Coupang: This type of information is not an incident requiring reporting under the U.S. Personal Information Act. So, we were not obligated to disclose it.] We said that we did not have an obligation, but we did so because we “considered that it is a situation that continues to attract attention.” Is that really true? If a U.S. listed company determines that a security incident is serious, it must report it to the SEC within 4 days in the form 8-K. The Coupang report released today says “significant” from the title, and the form was written in 8-K. Although it was a report submitted in accordance with the disclosure obligation, it is claimed that there was no obligation to disclose it. It is pointed out that the facts are inconsistent. [Son Dong-hoo/Attorney, New York, USA: Disclosure of serious cyber security incidents is (soon) mandatory. [They submitted the 8-K because it had a ‘significant impact.’] The report does not mention when Coupang judged this incident to be ‘significant.’ There are also suspicions that it is trying to avoid fines for delayed disclosure by arguing that it knew about the leak a month ago, but judged it to be significant only recently. Amid growing criticism, Deputy Prime Minister for Science and Technology Bae Kyung-hoon is discussing with the Fair Trade Commission the suspension of Coupang’s operations. (Video editing: Seong-Hoon Jeong, Design: Ye-Eun Jang) Reporter Seung-Hoon Choi noisycart@sbs.co.kr[View full article] ‘United States public announcement’ only 4 hours before the hearing… A serious accident now? (Shortcut)

[Anhamuin Coupang, effective competition is the answer] Lina Khan’s warning… A structure in which illegal profits are greater than fines [Editor's Note] There is an analysis that Coupang's continued controversies and absence from the National Assembly resulted from the absence of a check force in the market. Structural problems in which the profits from a monopoly position are judged to be greater than regulatory costs such as fines are also considered to be the cause. It is pointed out that the government's artificial intervention or moral appeal alone has its limits. Normalizing the distribution ecosystem by restoring ‘effective competition’ and establishing prior regulations in line with global standards are presented as fundamental solutions. There is criticism that Coupang's repeated controversies stem from capitalist profit and loss calculations in which 'the profits gained from illegal activities are greater than fines.' Experts advise that it is urgent to introduce a system that imposes punitive compensation that affects the existence of a company and holds direct criminal responsibility for management. According to the industry on the 18th, Coupang has been sanctioned several times for violating the Fair Trade Act, but was imposed a low fine compared to its sales volume. Following 8 million won in false and exaggerated advertising in 2017, 3.297 billion won in abuse of power against suppliers in 2021, and 400 million won in violation of the Subcontracting Act in 2022, the company was fined 162.8 billion won last year for algorithm manipulation. Coupang expects annual sales of 50 trillion won this year. Assuming that 15 million WoW membership subscribers pay the monthly fee without leaving each month, Coupang's annual sales from subscription fees alone are more than 1.4 trillion won. The calculation is that even if the Fair Trade Commission imposes fines worth trillions of won, it will be difficult to damage the company's financial structure. Former Chairman of the U.S. Federal Trade Commission (FTC), Lina Khan, an expert in big tech antitrust regulation, said, "If the profits gained from violating the law are greater than the fine, it is a failure of law enforcement," and emphasized, "We should not allow a situation where fines are simply regarded as business costs." Industry official A said, "Coupang is a supplier with labor issues." He criticized the company, saying, “Despite all-round criticism, including abuse of power and government regulations, we are consistently refusing to respond under the pretext of ‘customer convenience.’” He added, “This is a method rarely seen in Korean companies.” Legal experts say, "Criminal charges are more effective than fines... Punishment of those responsible must be strengthened." Gye-Jun Son, a lawyer at Daeryun Law Firm, said, "Companies with large sales do not care much about the amount of fines imposed by the Fair Trade Commission," and suggested strengthening 'criminal punishment' for top managers as a solution. He is an expert in the field of fair trade who has served in key positions at the Fair Trade Commission, including the Subcontracting Division, Cartel Division, and Litigation Affairs Office. Attorney Son explained, "What companies are most afraid of is the CEO being reported to the prosecution," adding, "Companies become nervous only when a separate investigation is conducted in addition to the Fair Trade Act and the CEO is directly the subject of investigation." He went on to suggest, “We need to strengthen the criminal punishment provisions specified in individual laws such as the Personal Information Protection Act and make the CEO, the top person in charge, take legal responsibility when a serious illegal act occurs to create deterrence.” This is an analysis that could put direct pressure on executives such as Coupang Chairman Kim Beom-seok, who has recently been controversial for failing to attend the National Assembly. Experts emphasize a regulatory shift from 'post-detection detection' to 'proactive discipline'. A representative example is the ‘Platform Fair Competition Promotion Act’ (Platform Act) being promoted by the Fair Trade Commission. The goal is to designate market-dominant business operators in advance and block the four major illegal practices, such as preferential treatment and tie-in sales. There is also a need to introduce a 'temporary suspension order' that immediately suspends services if irreparable damage is expected even before a final judgment is made. It is a device to prevent market disruption caused by continued illegal activities. There is an urgent need to shift the burden of proof in the EU style and expand punitive damages in the Korean style. Shifting the burden of proof and expanding the punitive damages system to increase the effectiveness of regulations are also tasks. For cases that are difficult to prove, such as algorithm manipulation, platform companies should be held responsible for proving their integrity when suspicions are raised, as in the European Union's Digital Market Act (DMA). Some argue that the 'punitive damages system' introduced in the domestic subcontracting law should be expanded to cover all platform monopoly activities. Currently, the Subcontracting Act stipulates compensation of three times the actual loss for five major acts, such as unfair price reduction and cancellation of consignment. Since last August, liability for compensation for technology theft has been strengthened up to five times. Attorney Son argued, "The United States' triple punitive damages system was introduced because it was proven to be effective in suppressing actual illegal activities," and added, "As there is discussion in Korea that the compensation limit should be increased up to 10 times to resolve the recent controversy over punitive punishment, we should consider introducing an effective penalty." On the 17th, the National Assembly's Political Affairs Committee discussed personal information leaks, etc. An amendment to the Personal Information Protection Act was passed, raising the upper limit of fines for serious violations from 3% of total sales to a maximum of 10%. If this law is applied, Coupang's fine will increase to a maximum of 5 trillion won. However, Coupang's information leak occurred before the amendment was passed, so it is excluded from retroactive application. Accordingly, Song Kyung-hee, chairman of the Personal Information Protection Committee, said, "There is a need to consider imposing a punitive fine, even through the enactment of a special Coupang law or separate legislation." Reporter Hwang Jeong-won (jwhwang@mt.co.kr)[View full article] [S Report] ③Coupang’s 5 trillion won is also ‘a cotton bat’… “Criminal punishment is also a solution” (Shortcut)

Songpa Police Station conducts investigation into complainant... Afterwards, the police, who were transferred to the Seoul Metropolitan Government, began a full-fledged investigation into the case in which former CEO Park Dae-joon and Coupang Corporation were sued in relation to Coupang's large-scale customer information leak. According to News 1's coverage on the 17th, Seoul Songpa Police Station summoned lawyer Jang Ji-woon of Daeryun Law Firm on the 11th to represent Mr. A, who sued Coupang Co., Ltd., former CEO Park, and Coupang's certification agent and certification manager on charges of violation of the Personal Information Protection Act and professional breach of trust. The police investigated. It was found that on the same day, the police confirmed the allegations of personal information leakage and professional breach of trust that were stated in the complaint regarding Coupang's customer information leak incident against Attorney Jang. Previously, Daeryun said in the complaint, "As managers and managers in charge of personal information processing, they neglected their duty to take safety measures to prevent information leakage," and "The person in charge leaked personal information without returning the authentication key even after leaving the company." He continued, "The managers also did not retrieve the authentication key of the person who left the company or “They did not take any action, such as replacing the authentication key.” Meanwhile, Songpa Police Station transferred the case to the Seoul Metropolitan Police Agency after investigating the complainant. Currently, this case is being investigated by the Seoul Metropolitan Police Agency Cyber Investigation Unit. Reporter Han Su-hyeon (shan@news1.kr), Reporter Kwon Jin-young (realkwon@news1.kr)[View full article] News 1 - [Exclusive] Police investigate in earnest the case of former CEO Park Dae-joon and other defendants in the 'Coupang incident' (Go here) Asia Economy - Police begin investigation into the case of former CEO Park Dae-joon and others accused in the 'Coupang incident' (Go here) Kyunghyang Shinmun - Police begin full-fledged investigation into management of ‘Coupang incident’... Transferred to Seoul Office after investigation of accuser (link) Hankyoreh - Police investigate complainant of Coupang Corporation and former CEO Park Dae-joon for ‘personal information leak’ (Click here) News Pim - Police begin investigation into former Coupang CEO Park Dae-joon's case accused of 'personal information leak' (Go here) Money Today - Police investigate accuser Park Dae-joon, former CEO of 'Coupang personal information leak' (link) Point Daily - Police begin investigation into ‘Coupang personal information leak’… Complainant investigation source (link)

Daeryun Future Family Business Succession Center launched... Interview with accountant Park Soo-jin “If shares are simply distributed equally or differentially, disputes over management rights and inheritance rights are frequent in the future generations. Therefore, it is essential to design a structure in advance to split business areas or separate domestic and international areas.” On the 17th, accountant Park Soo-jin of Daeryun Law Firm pointed out the core of family business succession as follows. Daeryun, which recently launched the Future Family Business Succession Center, is accelerating its support of inheritance and succession strategies for wealthy individuals and entrepreneurs. In addition, we plan to provide a solution to prevent double taxation in connection with the U.S. partner company ‘SJKP LLP’. Accountant Park, a key member of the center, is a veteran who has accumulated expertise in the domestic and overseas tax and finance fields by working for more than 17 years in overseas companies, including Samil Accounting Corporation and LG Chem Europe GmbH. Currently, Daeryun is in charge of family business inheritance, gifting, and tax saving strategies for corporate managers. Below is a Q&A with Accountant Park. -Why a detailed financial and tax diagnosis must be made before establishing a family business succession strategy. ▲The essence of family business succession is the transfer of shares. Many managers think of the family business succession inheritance deduction system to save taxes, but if they take over without recognizing hidden tax liabilities, the successor may suffer fatal blows such as a liquidity crisis due to massive taxation. Therefore, it is important to conduct a ‘health check’ to detect company-specific diseases. You may think of this as a simple choice. However, if you prioritize a thorough diagnosis, you will be able to not only discover structural risk factors but also explore business strengths and expansion opportunities for future generations. -If there is a specific strategy or know-how to optimize succession costs. ▲Listed companies are often relatively well prepared, but small unlisted companies are often unfamiliar with the valuation regulations under the Commercial Tax Act, such as the fact that sale price is applied first. Traditionally, the management of net asset value and net profit and loss value has been the key, but as courts are recently recognizing the Discounted Cash Flow (DCF) method, it is necessary to establish a tax minimization strategy by analyzing corporate types and precedents. We also recommend managing the size of small and medium-sized businesses. When a company grows beyond a certain size, tax benefits disappear and it suffers a premium assessment disadvantage. In this case, a strategic corporate restructuring scenario is essential. In the case of families with multiple children, it is recommended to allocate each specialized business area separately. - The mindset that managers must have for successful family business succession. ▲ It is common to allocate shares intensively to management successors. However, economic equity must be guaranteed both quantitatively and qualitatively to non-heir children. During the family business succession process, we often see cases where shares were distributed evenly or differentially. Nevertheless, the reason for seeking out a law firm in the end is because of the exercise of minority shareholders' rights and the intensification of management rights disputes between shareholders with equal shares. Based on this work experience, we recommend going beyond simply guaranteeing oil decentralization and designing a structure that makes it difficult for disputes to arise. To this end, it is important for managers to have an open mind to communicate two-way with family members before planning, rather than just unilaterally designate a successor. - Recently, as the number of wealthy people holding overseas assets has increased, interest in succession of overseas assets has also increased. If there are tax issues that they can easily miss. ▲For those with assets of a certain level, they turn to overseas due to fatigue from high rates of domestic taxation. However, even in this case, you may face unexpected tax burdens due to differences in tax law systems between countries. In particular, in the United States, assets around the world are included in the scope of taxation not only for citizens or permanent residents, but also for those with domicile status under tax law. In addition, there are frequent cases where advance gifts are made hastily without understanding the U.S. Step-up Basis (a system in which the acquisition price is readjusted to the market price upon inheritance), which actually increases the tax burden. Succession of overseas assets requires an integrated solution regarding the taxation and reporting systems of both countries, rather than a simple comparison of tax rates. -What field do you want to develop a specialized succession model in the future? ▲We plan to systematically strengthen the ‘cross-border inheritance and gift integrated solution’ that encompasses the assets held overseas by domestic asset owners. Tired of high rates of taxation, they are considering off-shoring, but due to insufficient review, they also go through the trial and error of reverse flipping (moving an overseas corporation back to Korea). Based on Daeryun's global network and information power, we will focus on minimizing clients' unnecessary cost waste and tax expenditures by supporting design and implementation from the beginning. Reporter Kwon Byeong-seok (bsk730@fnnews.com)[View full article] “Simple share distribution is the seed of conflict, so designing a family business succession structure by business and area is essential” (link)

Daeryun Law Firm announced on the 17th that it has signed an MOU with the Korea Law Academy and established a support model for nurturing professional talent in the legal affairs field and linking employment. The signing ceremony held on the 12th at Daeryun Law Firm's main office located in Park One, Yeouido, was attended by Park Dong-il, CEO of Daeryun Law Firm, and Korea Law Academy CEO Yang Sang-won and Director Lee Jong-hyeon. Korea Law Academy is an excellent training institution that has ranked first in the employment rate and number of employed people in the legal affairs field for 10 consecutive years from 2016 to this year, focusing on differentiated educational content and practice under the goal of ‘employing all trainees.’ It has been leading the industry through programs. In particular, it has been recognized for its reputation for practical education based on employment performance, such as being selected as an excellent training institution among domestic legal training institutions three times in a row, and awarded an appreciation plaque as an institution with an excellent employment rate by the Seoul Southern Employment Branch. Based on this MOU, both organizations plan to provide various practical opportunities in fields related to talent training. Specifically, we plan to assist in ▶ planning a curriculum centered on basic legal office job competencies and service mind, ▶ case-based practical training to strengthen adaptability to the field, and ▶ strengthening employment linkage based on talent matching. Yang Sang-won, CEO of Korea Law School, said, “Not only professionalism, but also attitude towards customers and service mind are important for legal clerks,” adding, “Through cooperation with Daeryun, we will help trainees settle down stably in the law firm field and start their careers. “We will help,” said Dong-il Park, CEO of Daeryun Law Firm. “Daeryun is driving customer satisfaction by providing customer-centered legal services and operating an innovative work system.” He also said, “Through this MOU, we will strengthen the practical talent training system and further improve the quality of legal services.” Meanwhile, Daeryun Law Firm is striving to strengthen the quality of legal services by continuously upgrading the digital-based work environment, including the introduction of an AI consultation system and an internal litigation support platform. [Law Leader] Reporter Son Dong-wook twson@lawleader.co.kr Daeryun Law Firm signs MOU with Korea Law Academy... “Establishment of a legal affairs talent training system” (link)

A company that violated the Waste Management Act three times... District office, 'each disposition' according to violation, court says "Defendant's disposition standard is the administrative office's 'business handling rules'... disposal suitability and law must be followed" The court ruled that even if the fines are added up for multiple violations, the fine in lieu of business suspension cannot exceed the upper limit set by law. Last October, the 4-3 administrative division of the Seoul High Court filed a lawsuit against the head of Yeonsu-gu District Office in Incheon by waste disposal company A and others. The appellate court overturned the original judgment and ruled to cancel the fine imposed on the plaintiffs in the appeal of the case for cancellation of administrative disposition for violation of the Waste Management Act. Company A and others received a fine in lieu of business suspension equivalent to 6% of sales from Yeonsu-gu for violating three regulations under the Waste Management Act in 2023, including not attaching and not carrying waste collection/transportation permits. The fine for these companies' violations is 1% of sales. It was 2%, and the district made this decision based on the standard that 'when there is more than one violation, each is disposed of according to the violation.' However, Company A and others were dissatisfied with the result and filed an administrative lawsuit. However, the court of first instance dismissed the plaintiff's claim, saying that there was no problem in the process of calculating the amount of the fine. Accordingly, Company A and others stipulated that the fine in lieu of business suspension in accordance with Article 28, Paragraph 1 of the Waste Management Act should not exceed 5% of sales. An appeal was filed, claiming that the fines could only be levied on the line. The court of the second trial ruled in favor of the plaintiff. The appellate court said, “The regulations presented by the defendant as standards for disposal are nothing more than rules for handling affairs within the administrative office. Since they do not have the effect of binding the public or the court, the appropriateness of disposal must follow the provisions of the Waste Management Act.” At the same time, “Same as the method calculated by the defendant, the sales amount is calculated by calculating fines for each violation and then simply adding them up.” “A fine exceeding 5% cannot be imposed,” he said, adding, “However, since the court cannot directly set the fine, we have no choice but to cancel the entire fine.” Attorney Shin Jong-soo of Daeryun Law Firm, who represented the plaintiff in the appeal, said, “According to the Waste Management Act, the fine in lieu of one month of business suspension is 2% of sales, 3 months is 3%, and 6 months is 3%. “It is 5%,” he said. “If there are multiple violations equivalent to 1 month and a fine is imposed by simply adding them up, an unreasonable result will occur where the fine is imposed in an amount that replaces 3 or 6 months of business suspension.”[View full article] “Laws take precedence over internal regulations”... fines for waste disposal companies, appeals ‘cancelled’ (link)

A man in his 20s, who was sentenced to prison in the first trial for sexually assaulting a drunken acquaintance, was acquitted in the appeal trial. According to the legal community on the 16th, the Chuncheon 1st Criminal Division of the Seoul High Court overturned the first trial ruling and declared him not guilty in the appeal trial of Mr. A, a man in his 20s who was put on trial on charges of quasi-rape in October. Mr. A got drunk while drinking together at the house of Mr. B, an acquaintance, in 2021. He was indicted on charges of following Mr. B into the room and sexually assaulting him, and was sentenced to 2 years and 6 months in prison in the first trial. Mr. A denied the charges, saying he had never had sexual relations with Mr. B. In addition, it was argued that Mr. B's statement was different at each stage of the investigation and was unreliable given that he described the damage in such detail that it was difficult to say that he was drunk. However, the first trial judged that Mr. B's statement was so specific and natural that he could not say it without directly experiencing it, and determined that there had been sexual intercourse between the two. Although some loss of memory may occur over time, the core part is that the credibility can be recognized by consistently stating the facts. The appellate court's judgment was different. The court said that Mr. B's statements regarding sexual relations were consistent and detailed, so it was difficult to reject them, but that it could not be concluded that he was in a drunken state of mind or body or was incapable of resisting. Although the amount of alcohol consumed at the time exceeded the usual amount of alcohol, it was not enough to cause loss of consciousness as it was consumed slowly over several hours, and the victim of sexual assault was described in detail by Mr. A, including how he took off his clothes and his words and actions. When Mr. B was questioned by his boyfriend about his relationship with Mr. A, he sued Mr. A, and the court ruled that it is difficult to rule out the possibility that Mr. B gave a defensive response and exaggerated the situation somewhat, or that he expressed feelings of victimization under the influence of his boyfriend. I saw it. Lee Ji-yeon, an attorney at the Daeryun Law Firm who represented Mr. A at the appellate trial, said, "If the victim's statement serves as evidence of guilt because there is no direct evidence to admit the facts of the indictment, there must be no reasonable doubt about the contents. We emphasized that the credibility of the statement is low based on the fact that the statement was changed at each stage of the trial, whether Mr. B was too drunk to resist at the time." Reporter Jeong Cheol-wook[View full article] A 20-year-old sentenced to prison for sexually assaulting a drunken acquaintance was found not guilty on appeal (link)

Chairman Kim Beom-seok and other three people did not attend on the 17th... Lawmakers from the ruling and opposition parties propose amendments such as 'strengthening representative responsibility' and announcing follow-up measures... Democratic Party "Prepares fundamental measures" Ahead of the National Assembly Science, Technology, Information and Communication Committee (Over-Defense) hearing on the 17th regarding the large-scale personal information leak, a 'half-length' hearing is expected as the three key members of Coupang submitted written reasons for non-attendance. According to political circles and industry sources on the 15th, the previous day, Kim Beom-seok Inc. The Chairman, Kang Han-seung, head of North American business development, and former CEO Dae-joon Park submitted a written statement explaining their absence from the hearing. Previously, at a plenary meeting on the 9th, the Committee decided to hold a hearing on the Coupang infringement incident at 10 a.m. on the 17th, and adopted six people as witnesses, including Chairman Kim, former CEO Park, General Manager Kang, Coupang CISO Brat Metis, Coupang Vice President of External Cooperation Min Byeong-gi, and Coupang Vice President of National Assembly and Government Affairs Cho Yong-woo. However, As the three people expressed their intention to not appear, the National Assembly announced that it plans to take legal action and other related decisions on the day of the hearing. A political official said, "As both ruling and opposition party lawmakers believe that the reason for non-appearance is inappropriate, a decision is expected to be made as the hearing progresses." He added, "Under the current law, mandatory attendance cannot be requested, so it will proceed as scheduled, focusing on witnesses such as Coupang's CISO." According to the National Assembly Testimony Appraisal Act, a request for witness attendance at a hearing can be made regardless of nationality or residence. Yes (Article 5). Failure to appear without a justifiable reason is subject to criminal punishment (Article 12), and the National Assembly may report the party who failed to appear to the investigative agency (Article 15). However, an accompanying order (Article 6) may be issued to the party to force attendance, but the accompanying order is limited to the National Assembly inspection. In fact, this hearing will be reduced to the attendance of Harold Rogers, Chief Administrative Officer and General Counsel of Coupang Inc., the 'Interim Representative for the 7th Day', and Brat Metis, Coupang CISO. Of course, Chairman Kim and others can express their intention to attend by resolving the reason for non-attendance. A statement of reasons for a witness's non-appearance must be submitted at least 3 days prior to the hearing, but there is no deadline for the intent to appear. However, according to the National Assembly, there has never been a case like this so far. Ji-woon Jang, a lawyer at Daeryun Law Firm, said, "It is unclear whether a proper investigation can be conducted against foreigners living abroad even if criminal charges are filed for non-appearance," and added, "We have no choice but to expect Chairman Kim himself to appear voluntarily depending on public opinion pressure or political judgment." Pressure on 'offensive crimes' is also expected. According to the National Assembly Bill Information System, People Power Party lawmaker Lee Man-hee and others proposed a bill to partially amend the Personal Information Protection Act, which stipulates that the current law (Article 64), which stipulates the standard for imposing fines for personal information leaks as 'less than 3/100 of total sales', should be raised to 6/100 of sales compared to major countries such as the United States. Park Beom-gye Representatives of the Democratic Party of Korea and others also proposed expanding the scope of group lawsuits (Article 51) and introducing fines for repetitive and serious personal information infringement incidents that allow for fines to be imposed within the range of 10% of total sales (newly established in Article 64-2 (2)). People Power Party lawmaker Kim Sang-hoon also proposed an amendment aimed at clarifying the responsibilities of representatives and strengthening the role of the personal information protection manager (Article 31). It was proposed. In a statement on the 14th, the National Assembly members including Choi Min-hee, Kim Hyun, Kim Woo-young, Noh Jong-myeon, Lee Joo-hee, Lee Jeong-heon, Lee Hoon-ki, Jeong Dong-young, Jo In-cheol, Han Min-soo, and Hwang Jeong-ah said, "The 'reason for the failure of the three Coupang witnesses' to appear cannot be condoned as an act of deceiving the Korean people," adding, "Chairman Kim 'resides overseas', former CEO Kang 'is not in a responsible position', and former Park The representative cited 'health reasons' and criticized it as "arrogance that ignores the people and an act that cuts off trust with the people." He added, "We will immediately push for legislation to prevent recurrence, such as strengthening governance responsibility, reinforcing attendance obligations, and establishing a response system for those responsible for staying abroad." Park Soo-hyun, chief spokesperson for the Democratic Party of Korea, met with reporters after the Supreme Committee meeting on this day and said, "We hope that the actual founder will make a responsible statement to the public, but we stand with the people for the fact that they have been avoiding it for over 10 years." “The party is also angry,” he said. “However, I understand that there is no means of coercion within the current National Assembly system, and the party will do its best to address the damage caused by the Coupang issue and to fundamentally address the issues.” Reporter Kim Myeong-shin (lila@news1.kr), Reporter Cho So-young (cho11757@news1.kr)[View full article] Coupang's 'half' hearing missing the key... What is the direction of the political world's 'sin of shame' (link)