Press Coverage

Crimes of small theft under 100,000 won have recently been on the rise again. After reaching a peak in 2009 during the global financial crisis, it has steadily decreased and recorded 40,583 cases in 2018, but after COVID-19, it gradually rose and recorded 107,138 cases last year, exceeding 100,000 cases again after 15 years. Since small-scale thefts occur so frequently, you may not consider the crime a big deal, but this is a wrong idea. Even if the amount of damage is small, small-scale theft is punished by the same legal standards as general theft. Theft is the act of illegally acquiring another person's property without the owner's consent. The core requirement for establishing a crime is that it must target ‘property’ owned or occupied by another person. Therefore, real estate that cannot be physically moved, such as land or buildings, is not an object of theft. In addition, the actor must have a clear intention to illegally acquire another person's property, that is, an ‘intent to acquire illegally.’ For example, even if you initially brought an item out of simple curiosity, if you later develop the desire to use or dispose of it for personal gain without intending to return it, this can also be considered a theft. The sentence varies depending on the specific method of the crime. The most basic type, simple theft, is punishable by up to 6 years in prison or a fine of up to 10 million won. If you break into another person's home at night and steal property, the crime of 'night-time home invasion and theft' is applied and you are punished more severely with up to 10 years in prison. In particular, in the case of habitual offenders, the punishment can be increased by up to one-half of the statutory penalty due to the serious nature of the crime. In addition, if a weapon is used or two or more people collude to commit a crime, a special theft can be committed and the person can be imprisoned for between 1 and 10 years. So, how should you respond if you are accused of theft due to a moment of mistake? The key to determining the sentence is to logically prove to the investigative agency and the court that there is a ‘sincere effort to recover from the damage’ and ‘there is no risk of recidivism.’ The most decisive mitigating factor is by far the ‘agreement with the victim.’ Since theft is not a crime of involuntary punishment, the agreement does not completely avoid punishment, but it has the greatest effect on lowering the sentence. Beyond simply reimbursing the value of the stolen items, it is common to attempt to reach a settlement with an amount that includes compensation for the victim's mental distress. If an agreement is reached, a non-punishment application form must be received and submitted stating that "the offender does not wish to be punished" to ensure a substantial reduction in sentence. However, because victims often refuse to communicate directly with the perpetrator, it is effective to politely convey the intention to reach an agreement through a lawyer. In addition to reaching an agreement with the victim, it is also important to show deep regret for one's mistakes. It is a good idea to submit a statement of reflection that contains the background that led to the crime, the pain the victim suffered as a result, and a specific pledge on how he or she will live in the future. In addition, the objective circumstances that warrant leniency must be proven with ‘sentencing materials.’ Petitions written by family members or acquaintances serve as good evidence to show that the defendant is a conscientious member of society. In addition, if the crime was committed due to difficulties in making a living, you can appeal for leniency by submitting documents related to your debt or unemployment, and if it was due to a psychiatric problem such as impulse control disorder, you can submit a relevant medical certificate and treatment history. Attorney Lee Ki-jun of Daeryun Law Firm said, "In the end, the reduction of the sentence for theft is centered on three axes: recovery from damage, serious reflection, and prevention of repeat offenses. Even if it is small-scale theft, it is a serious crime that can result in a prison sentence if you respond laxly. Therefore, the case “Receiving the assistance of a professional lawyer from the beginning and systematically responding from agreement with the victim to preparing sentencing materials is a wise way to prevent a momentary mistake from becoming a big stain on your life.” Global Epic CP Lee Soo-hwan / lsh@globalepic.co.kr To reach a settlement on the rapidly increasing 'modern-day Jean Valjean' petty theft crime (Go here)

Driver said, "I was drunk and slipped on the accelerator pedal" Police said, "I don't see any evidence of intentional driving" A driver who was accused of damaging three parked cars while asleep while drunk was cleared of charges. On the 29th, Cheongju Cheongwon Police Station in North Chungcheong Province decided not to send A, a man in his 30s, who was accused of driving his car about 10 meters while drunk on a road in Cheongju last July and hitting cars parked in front of him. Mr. A's blood alcohol content at the time was over 0.1%, which was at the level of license revocation. Mr. A denied the charge, saying that while he was sleeping to sober up, he turned over and unintentionally stepped on the accelerator. Mr. A explained, "Because I was intoxicated at the time, I did not even realize that I had stepped on the accelerator and the collision occurred." A police official explained, "It was not an accident that occurred while driving while drunk." "It is acknowledged that the suspect sat in the driver's seat after drinking and turned on the engine and lights, and in that state, the vehicle was pushed forward and hit the victim's vehicle," he said. "When checking the CCTV footage around the front black box site of the victim's vehicle, there are no circumstances showing that the suspect drove intentionally," he explained. Attorney Daeryun Dong-eun, a law firm representing Mr. A, said, "Driving under the Road Traffic Act means 'using it according to the original usage on the road.' “It only applies to cases of intentional driving,” he said. “In the case of Mr. A, he did not start the car to drive, but got into the car for the purpose of sobering up and sleeping, and we were able to lead to a non-transportation as it was revealed that it was the result of unconscious behavior, not intentional.”[View full article] I fell asleep while drunk and 3 cars crashed... What does the police think of a blood alcohol concentration of 0.1%? (Shortcut)

Attorney Daeryun Lee Il-hyung " FDA, AIand IoT Strengthening regulations on medical devices-Strict marketing regulations""FDA Permit process is complex but predictable...Compliance investment is a necessity, not an option" Contributors and Pharmacy Newspaper 「medical device」We planned a series related to. In this article, we will look at the legal regulations and entry strategies of domestic medical device companies when entering the U.S. market.. 1. Recently, the rush of Korean medical device companies to enter the U.S. continues.. K-Following beauty success K-This is because the potential for global expansion of medical technology is attracting attention.. However, when we meet companies preparing to enter the U.S. market, FDA Many people are confused when faced with the complexity of the permitting process and various entry strategy options.. The contributor recently held consultations with dozens of companies through a COEX consultation booth event., Recognizing that most of the questions the working-level staff were curious about overlapped, we felt the need to organize key points.. In this contribution FDA We would like to introduce content that may be helpful to practitioners, focusing on the permitting process and proven entry strategies.. 2. FDA Permit Procedure, America is trickier than you think FDAAccording to the risk posed to patients, medical devices are Class I, II, IIIDivide and manage into. Because the permit procedures required for each grade are different,, Above all, the first hurdle is to find out exactly what grade your product falls into..Class I The product may seem relatively simple, but, not really. mostly 510(k)is exempted, but FDA Facility registration and equipment list registration are required., Compliance with the quality system is also essential.. In particular, products that are classified as quasi-drugs or cosmetics in Korea may be treated as medical devices in the United States, so caution is required.. Class II This is the area that most product companies worry about.. 510(k)Equivalence with existing approved products must be proven through, The key here is appropriate Predicate Deviceis to find. Even products with the same function predicate device Permission may vary depending on selection.. FDA The review period is officially 90It's work, but, In reality, if you request additional data or go through a supplementary process, 4-6It usually takes months. Class III Product is the most demanding area. Fillers are a representative example., PMA(Pre-market approval)Large-scale clinical trial data is needed to receive. Minimum permit period 180It can take anywhere from one day to several years, so there is sufficient time, Must be approached with financial resources. 3. Direct payment or indirect payment?, That is the problem. The biggest concern for Korean medical device companies is their entry strategy.. It is largely divided into a direct payment method that sells directly to hospitals and a short payment method that uses distributors.. The biggest attraction of direct payment is profitability.. Since there are no distributor commissions, you can maximize your margins., You also have direct control over brand management and customer relationships.. Additionally, you can receive direct feedback from hospitals and medical staff, which is advantageous for improving products or identifying market trends.. However, the reality of direct payment is not easy.. A large initial investment is required to deploy sales personnel and build a logistics system throughout the United States.. The burden of understanding and responding to different regulations in each state is significant.. One large medical device company also attempted direct sales at first, but eventually switched to partnering with partners.. On the other hand, the biggest advantage of Gannap is quick market entry.. The initial investment burden is low as you can utilize already established distribution networks and customer relationships., Distributors are also responsible for complex regulations and logistics procedures.. However, profitability declines due to distributor commissions., The downside is that it is difficult to directly control brand management or customer relationships.. In case of short payment GPO(Group Purchasing Organization)me DistribuotrA representative method is to use. However, they are price competitive, product competitiveness, Because we attach great importance to supply stability, having sufficient competitiveness is a priority.. 4. Practical know-how found in success stories Looking at the cases of companies consulted by the contributor, several patterns are identified.. For products dealing with rare or unique diseases, direct delivery was advantageous.. This is because a direct approach is more effective in areas where patient numbers are limited and expertise is important.. On the other hand, general consumables or general-purpose medical devices were often cheaper..A medical device company was attempting direct delivery by establishing a U.S. corporation based on its differentiated technological capabilities as the world's first developer.. On the other hand, disposable medical device manufacturers chose a strategy of gradually expanding the market, starting with government bidding.. This is a method of expanding into the private market after gaining experience in the government market where information is relatively open and entry barriers are low.. 5. Latest regulatory trends, Points you shouldn't miss FDAIs AIand IoT Regulations on basic medical devices are being strengthened.. In particular, continuous learning AI For algorithms, the existing 510(k) A new regulatory framework is being developed as the system is difficult to manage.. Companies developing these products must carefully monitor regulatory changes.. Marketing regulations are becoming more stringent.. FDA Advertising for uses outside of the approved indications or claiming exaggerated effects may result in severe sanctions.. UDI(Unique Device Identifier)This is also a part that cannot be overlooked.. Class I Even if it is a product UDI Attachment and GUDID Registration is often required, You must understand the exact requirements in advance. 6. Conclusion and Recommendations The US medical device market is certainly attractive, but, Thorough preparation is essential for success. Above all, it is important to accurately understand the characteristics of your products and company capabilities and then select an appropriate strategy.. FDA The permitting process is a complex but predictable area.. Trial and error can be minimized if you prepare sufficiently in advance and get help from experts.. Especially in recent times where the regulatory environment is rapidly changing, investing in compliance has become a necessity rather than an option.. Korea’s medical device industry’s technology has already reached a world-class level.. Now, I am confident that if we have a systematic entry strategy and ability to respond to regulations, we will be able to succeed in the U.S. market.. [View full article] [Contribution] What medical device companies need to know when entering the U.S. - FDA approval process and entry strategy (link)

It is not unfamiliar to see cases where a guardian caring for a dementia patient visits the hospital on behalf of the patient but turns away after being told that the patient must come in person. For elderly patients with limited mobility or those who need long-term medication due to chronic diseases, proxy prescriptions, or more precisely, 'proxy receipt of prescriptions', are not just convenience, but a key element of continuity of treatment. The current medical law stipulates that only patients who have been directly examined by a doctor, dentist, or oriental medicine doctor can receive a prescription, but there are exceptions, such as when the patient is unconscious or has significant difficulty moving and the same prescription is given for a long period of time for the same injury. It is stipulated that prescriptions can be received on behalf of only under certain circumstances. However, even in this case, only the patient's immediate ascendants, descendants, spouse, spouse's immediate ascendants, siblings, etc. can serve as representative recipients. The Pharmaceutical Affairs Act also, in principle, presupposes direct receipt by the patient. However, in a reality where aging is rapidly progressing, these regulations place a significant burden on patients and their families. It is a bigger problem for elderly patients in rural areas who have difficulty traveling long distances, and for their guardians who must work simultaneously with care and work. The reason why the demand for ‘representative receipt of prescriptions’ is growing is clear. As of 2024, the population aged 65 or older exceeds 20% of the total, entering a super-aging society, and the prevalence of dementia, cancer, and chronic diseases continues to rise. Coupled with the problem of medically vulnerable areas, the current system, which requires patients to visit the hospital in person for simple check-ups or medication prescriptions, shows a gap with the flow of patient-centered medical care. However, indiscriminate permission is by no means the solution. First of all, the doctor's face-to-face treatment of the patient must be provided. If patients do not receive treatment directly, it is difficult for doctors to confirm accurate clinical symptoms and changes, and the possibility of drug side effects or misuse increases. Additionally, if the medicine is incorrectly delivered to a third party or received without the patient's consent, it may lead to privacy protection issues as well as legal disputes. In particular, these days, social problems such as drug distribution and drug abuse are frequently occurring due to the prescription and proxy reception of psychotropic drugs, which are narcotic drugs. The key is to find a balance between convenience and safety. Therefore, institutional improvements need to be made. For example, there is a method of institutionalizing a method for family members to legally receive money on their behalf by introducing a strict guardian registration system based on patient consent. If we carefully review the side effects that these measures may cause and prepare a comprehensive institutional solution at the hospital treatment, prescription, and pharmacy stages, we will be able to find an answer to the problem of balance between currency exchange and personal information protection. The issue of proxy prescriptions, or proxy collection of prescriptions, is an area where patient convenience and safety, medical professionals' responsibilities, and patients' rights are complexly intertwined. However, what is clear is that this is a problem directly related to the quality of life of patients and the care system of society as a whole. Establishing an institutional solution that ensures patient safety while alleviating the burden on families is an important task that our medical community must solve as we move towards a super-aging society.[View full article] [Contribution] Proxy prescription, balance between patient convenience and safety (link)

As international discussions surrounding the leadership and regulation of digital asset hegemony intensify due to the rise of stablecoins, Korean-American lawyers from each country unanimously emphasized the need to create a trusted market. At the 32nd regular general meeting of IAKL held at the Korea University Law School in Anam-dong, Seongbuk-gu, Seoul on September 25, Taejun Bae (37th Judicial Research and Training Institute), attorney at Lin Law Firm, said of the Virtual Asset User Protection Act that was implemented last year, “There is criticism that Korean-style protection regulations are excessive.” The Virtual Asset User Protection Act mandates banks to trust deposits of digital asset users in preparation for fraud and hacking incidents. There was opposition that investment was discouraged due to low liquidity and the possibility of being used as an international payment method was reduced. Several digital asset basic laws have also been proposed in the National Assembly. It contains regulations such as imposing disclosure obligations on the issuance and distribution of digital assets and prohibiting unfair transactions. Attorney Bae said, “Regulations in Korea tend to be greatly influenced by social or political influences,” and added, “We need to watch for changes in the future.” Other countries are also strengthening digital asset regulations. A representative country is the United States. First, regulations are being unified. Dong-hoo Son, a foreign attorney at Daeryun Law Firm (New York, USA), said, “The joint statement issued by the U.S. Securities and Exchange Commission and the Commodity Exchange Commission shows a strong will to regulate digital assets.” The two organizations have been fighting over jurisdiction over whether digital assets are securities or products, but formalized regulatory cooperation in September 2025. The reason for strengthening regulations is to create a highly trustworthy market environment for digital assets. Park Wan-ki, a foreign lawyer at Liberty Chambers (Hong Kong), mentioned a survey showing that public trust in regulated platforms is more than 20% higher than in unregulated platforms, and said, "Hong Kong is trying to become 'Wall Street' rather than the 'Wild West' (the West, a symbol of disorder) of the cryptocurrency market." Hong Kong restricts access to ordinary people, not professional investors, so that they can only invest in digital assets regulated by financial authorities. Some countries have flexible responses. Switzerland is showing flexibility in the way it regulates digital assets within the existing civil and financial law systems. Park Min-young (2nd bar exam), attorney at Sedam Law Firm, explained, “For some digital assets, tokens are initially issued in Switzerland and then obtained a license in the EU, which has strict consumer protection regulations.” Attorney Park also warned, "Switzerland has great flexibility, but you must follow the regulations of the market in which you actually want to conduct business. Just because regulations are lax, you should not use them as a means of evasion."[View full article] Digital assets: regulation or flexibility? “We must build a trusted market” (Shortcut)

Daeryun Law Firm joined hands with industry and private companies to innovate legal services and respond to policies in the era of artificial intelligence (AI). Ahead of the huge institutional change called the 'AI Basic Act' scheduled to be implemented in 2026, this is the first preemptive step to establish a cooperation system among legal experts, industries, and companies. Daeryun Law Firm announced on the 30th that it signed a business agreement (MOU) with the Korea Artificial Intelligence Association and Skyes Korea Co., Ltd. at its Seoul headquarters branch office on the 25th and established a triangular cooperation system for AI-based legal service innovation and policy response. The agreement ceremony was attended by key officials including CEO Dong-il Park and Lee-sun Choi of Daeryun Law Firm, Chairman Kim Hyun-cheol and Executive Vice Chairman Kim Geon-hoon of the Korea Artificial Intelligence Association, and Kim Hee-jin, CEO of Sky's Korea. This business agreement started from the fact that the use of artificial intelligence is spreading throughout the legal field. Recently, AI has become a means of increasing efficiency and strengthening expertise in legal document writing, contract analysis, etc., and the paradigm of legal services is also changing. The AI ​​Framework Act, scheduled to go into effect in January 2026, is expected to be a major institutional turning point for both industry and the legal profession. Close cooperation between associations, companies, and legal experts is required in the process of preparing subordinate laws. The parties to the agreement plan to build a convergence model encompassing industry, law, and policy based on their respective strengths. It is expected that the association's network of over 1,600 member companies, Sky's Korea's consulting and marketing capabilities, and Daeryun's legal service expertise will be combined to create a cooperative system that can support the entire AI ecosystem. The three organizations will work together to develop the ability to utilize AI as a core competitiveness of legal experts and to position AI as a means to complement and strengthen legal services, rather than a simple substitute. In addition, in line with the implementation of the Basic AI Act, we plan to jointly pursue legal and policy responses such as participation in regulatory sandboxes and legislative support. We will strengthen corporate-tailored AI introduction consulting and government business connection support and promote the spread of AI solutions by utilizing the association's member company network. At the same time, we provide advice on legal issues and regulatory issues that arise in the industrial field and continue to propose joint policies and improve regulations. “Through this agreement, the association will be able to work with legal experts and companies to respond to policies and regulations for the development of the AI industry,” said Kim Hyeon-cheol, president of the Artificial Intelligence Association. “The convergence of AI and legal services will create new global competitiveness. We will support industrial development together with the association and companies,” said Park Dong-il, CEO of Daeryun. “Reporter Jeong-won Hwang.” (jwhwang@mt.co.kr)[View full article] Money S - Daeryun, leading AI innovation... Establishment of a ‘triangular cooperation’ system with the Artificial Intelligence Association and Skyz (Go here) Point Daily - ‘Korea Artificial Intelligence Association, Daeryun and Skyz Korea MOU for cooperation in AI ecosystem development’ (link) Artificial Intelligence News - Korea Artificial Intelligence Association and Daeryun Law Firm provide one-stop legal and marketing solutions to AI companies (Go here)

The court on charges of 'quasi-fraud' intentionally targeting market gains to build a country house said, "Is schizophrenia recognized... but it is difficult to say that it is significantly cheaper" A man who was put on trial on charges of deceiving a schizophrenia patient and purchasing a land permit at a lower price than the market price was found not guilty. On the 28th of last month, the Changwon District Court found Mr. A, a man in his 60s, not guilty on charges of quasi-fraud. Mr. A was accused of intentionally approaching Mr. B, who suffered from schizophrenia, and purchasing the land permit at a lower price than the market price while acquiring the right to use a river in Miryang-si, Gyeongsangnam-do to build a country house in 2021. However, Mr. A denied the charge. At the time of the transaction, we had several conversations with Mr. B, and the intention is that Mr. B had reasonable judgment regarding the disposition of the rights. At the same time, Mr. A emphasized, “I could not understand at all that Mr. B was suffering from mental illness.” The court found Mr. A not guilty. The court explained, “According to the market valuation results, the standard market price of the license in question is 3,544,140 won, and the defendant purchased it at a price that is 15% lower than the market price,” adding, “It is difficult to say that the rights were acquired at a price so low that it constitutes quasi-fraud.” Kim Kyung-hwan, a lawyer at law firm Daeryun who represented Mr. “Intentionality is the issue,” he said. “The fact that Mr. B was diagnosed with schizophrenia does not allow us to conclude that the defendant was aware of Mr. B’s mental and physical disability at the time of signing the contract.” It was also stated, “Mr. B faithfully proved that he was in a state where he was able to distinguish between interests and interests at the time, such as proposing to transfer the permit to Mr. A first.”[View full article] “I deceived a patient with schizophrenia”... ‘Permit appraisal results’ that overturned the fraud case (link)

[Anchor] Hyundai Engineering & Construction, a party to a negotiated contract, unilaterally abandoned the construction of Gadeok New Airport, but the Ministry of Strategy and Finance, which is in charge of the National Contract Act, stated that it cannot impose sanctions. Local civil society groups are protesting, saying that if Hyundai Engineering & Construction, which has caused significant disruption to national projects, is not designated as an unfair company, it will set a dangerous precedent that will shake the foundation of the National Contract Act. Reporter Min-wook Kim reports the news. [Reporter] Last May, Hyundai Engineering & Construction, the preferred bidder for a negotiated contract, unilaterally abandoned the construction of Gadeok New Airport. It unilaterally withdrew after requesting 108 months instead of the 84 months stated in the bidding notice, sparking controversy over violation of the National Contract Act. According to Article 27 of the National Contract Act, if a contract is not concluded or performed without a justifiable reason, the bidder's eligibility to participate in the bidding is restricted as an unfair company. In other words, whether there was a 'justifiable reason' is a legal matter. This is an issue. Regarding this, the Ministry of Strategy and Finance, which is in charge of the National Contract Act, is of the position that legal sanctions are difficult to impose. The Ministry of Strategy and Finance stated that it is difficult to say that Hyundai Engineering & Construction has an obligation to conclude a contract because it has only submitted basic design documents and has not even signed a preliminary contract. On the other hand, civil society groups criticized that setting a precedent of not imposing penalties on companies that unilaterally give up on a negotiated contract during the process will have a serious negative impact on all future national projects. [Lee Ji-hoo/Chairman of Citizen Sympathy, Preparing for a Future Society] “I don’t understand the fact that the government cannot impose sanctions on Hyundai Engineering & Construction, which only pursues corporate profits.” The legal community believes that a comprehensive review of contracts and public offering guidelines is necessary, separate from the interpretation of the Ministry of Strategy and Finance's laws. [Park Dong-il/Attorney] (Article 27, Paragraph 1, Item 9, Article 27, Paragraph 1, Item 9 of the National Contract Act) provides that the company can be designated as an unfair business operator even in cases where it ‘refuses to conclude a contract without justifiable reasons,’ and it appears that sanctions against Hyundai Engineering & Construction will be determined through a closer review of the facts and a specific judgment.” As the Ministry of Land, Infrastructure and Transport announced that it would review whether to impose sanctions after receiving the response from the Ministry of Strategy and Finance, attention is focused on whether or not it will be finally designated as an unfair business operator. This is Min-wook Kim from KNN.[View full article] Why not sanction Hyundai Engineering & Construction, which is a ‘hindrance to national projects’? 'Spreading anger' (Shortcut)

The aftermath of the Korean detention incident that occurred in the U.S. state of Georgia continues to linger. In particular, the situation appears to have entered a new phase as workers who were detained at the time came forward claiming 'human rights violations'. First of all, one of the biggest issues currently being raised is ‘arrest and detention without warrant.’ According to some media reports, there was no warrant at the time of arrest, and related documents were reportedly prepared only a few days after the workers were detained. The Fourth Amendment to the U.S. Constitution fundamentally limits warrantless arrest and detention. Even in the case of immigration raids, arrests are not permitted based on simple estimates or vague suspicions; they must meet the standard of 'reasonable cause' and proceed in accordance with procedures guaranteed by the Constitution. The basis for the crackdown by Immigration and Customs Enforcement (ICE) appears to be Article 287 of the Federal Immigration Act (INA §287, 8 U.S.C. §1357). The provision does give immigration authorities the authority to investigate foreigners suspected of being in the country illegally and, in certain cases, to arrest them without a warrant. However, the premise is that there must be a ‘reasonable reason’. If arrests are made en masse without individual reasons in a large-scale crackdown, it will not be free from unconstitutional controversy as it conflicts with the Fourth Amendment of the Constitution (prohibition of unreasonable searches and arrests). Therefore, detained workers may raise questions about the guarantee of these constitutional rights. The lack of procedural notice can also be pointed out as a problem. Foreigners detained during immigration procedures must receive a 'Notice to Appear' (NTA), which must clearly state the reasons for deportation. If the immigration authorities did not properly notify this, it is worth claiming a procedural defect. In addition, workers can use a legal tool called 'Motion to Suppress Evidence' to request that evidence obtained during illegal arrests be excluded from the court. In addition to simple detention procedures, workers can raise legal issues if they have ever been in a situation where their human rights are violated during the detention process. Immigration detention does not provide a public defender as in criminal cases, but the right to contact a lawyer is guaranteed under Article 292 of the Immigration Act. Therefore, if phone calls or interviews are restricted at the time of detention, this may constitute a violation of constitutional due process. In addition, issues such as overcrowding, poor hygiene, and lack of medical services in detention facilities can all be disputed as violations of due process under the 8th Amendment (prohibition of cruel or abnormal punishment) or Article 5 of the Constitution. In particular, if you are not provided with the medication you normally take, it is highly likely that it will be considered a serious violation of your rights. In fact, in 2020, when COVID-19 was spreading around the world, an incident occurred at the Mesa Bird Immigrant Detention Center in California, USA, where a Korean man in his 70s committed suicide ahead of deportation proceedings. At the time, the deceased suffered from diabetes, high blood pressure, and heart disease, and applied for bail due to the risk of COVID-19 infection, but the immigration court dismissed the request. Afterwards, the deceased's family filed a lawsuit against ICE and the immigration detention center operator for damages based on medical neglect and deliberate indifference. During the lawsuit, the issues that the man suffered from before his detention and whether he received treatment during his detention became an issue. However, the case did not reach a court ruling, and the case was closed through an agreement. In this situation, what many people are curious about is the 'possibility of filing a lawsuit.' The answer is 'possible'. In principle, U.S. courts allow lawsuits filed by foreign plaintiffs, and jurisdiction is recognized because the illegal acts occurred within the United States. However, there may be difficulties in securing evidence and proceeding with procedures due to living abroad, and burden of costs. Types that can be claimed include illegal detention, violation of due process, medical neglect, civil rights infringement, and illegal death. For this purpose, objective evidence is needed, such as documents at the time of detention, medical data, statements by the person and his or her colleagues, and consulate records. Also, in practice, you can appoint a professional lawyer in the United States, secure a statement, and submit a complaint to the competent federal court. Individual lawsuits are also possible, but in reality, class lawsuits may be a more efficient method. If a class lawsuit is filed, the likelihood of winning is also high. Just as the bereaved family filed a lawsuit for damages and received financial compensation in the case of the death of a man in his 70s mentioned above, the workers involved in the detention case in Georgia will also be able to receive legal judgment. Small and Medium Business Team[View full article] Aftermath of continued detention in Georgia... What are the issues in the damages lawsuit? (Shortcut)

Introducing the law firms’ Yellow Envelope Law Task Force. Daeryun Law Firm formed a task force (TF) last month to present practical countermeasures to corporate clients from the beginning of the implementation of the so-called Yellow Envelope Act (Amendment to Articles 2 and 3 of the Labor Union Act). We focus on providing comprehensive legal support encompassing customized personnel systems and overall labor-management relations to help corporate customers develop predictable management strategies and minimize unnecessary disputes. The TF is headed by In-Tae Bang (Training Institute 41st class), an attorney with extensive experience in human resources, labor, industrial accident consulting, and litigation representation. Attorney Jeong Sang-hyeok (bar exam taken 10 times) specializes in preventing corporate risks based on his experience as a member of the deliberation and investigation committee on workplace bullying, sexual harassment, and human rights violations. Attorney Chang-min Jeong (12 cases) has handled a number of corporate-related civil and industrial accident cases. Labor attorney Nam Seo-hye, who has provided labor consulting in the IT, service, manufacturing, distribution, and hospitals and clinics fields, and labor attorney Yang Hee-chun, who has been in charge of responding to Labor Office and Labor Relations Commission cases and workplace harassment investigations, are also adding their expertise to the TF. The TF seeks to achieve the two axes of minimizing corporate legal risks and stabilizing labor-management relations at the same time. To this end, we are preparing services such as △a response manual for each key issue of the Yellow Envelope Act △risk diagnosis and simulation for each company △establishing a response system in case of a dispute △operating an in-house training program. In particular, as the characteristics of companies differ depending on the industry and size, TF's biggest differentiation is that it provides customized solutions for companies rather than uniform advice. The TF holds regular seminars and webinars to inform corporate officials, including personnel and labor managers, of the main contents of the amendment and expected legal risks. Recently, a 'Yellow Envelope Law Response Strategy Seminar' was held at the Seoul Headquarters branch office. Regarding the on-site atmosphere felt during this process, Attorney Bang said, "When dealing with corporate clients, most of them feel a great deal of anxiety about 'what to prepare after the law goes into effect.'" He added, "In particular, the human resources and labor teams need a detailed roadmap as they need to prepare internal regulations, labor-management negotiation strategies, and risk response scenarios in line with changes in the system." We plan to predict and analyze cases and, based on this, build a response model that companies can use immediately in the field. We are also preparing practical guidelines and casebooks that companies can use on their own. Attorney Bang said, “We will cooperate with the government, academia, labor-management organizations, etc. to provide advice from an objective and balanced perspective,” and added, “We will do our best to ensure that the implementation of the Yellow Envelope Act becomes an opportunity for stable growth for companies.” Reporter Park Seon-woo (closely@bloter.net)[View full article] [Yellow Envelope Law Firm Restaurant] Daeryun, reduces risks and supports stabilization of labor-management relations (link)