Press Coverage

Introduction Under the current law, bicycles are classified as automobiles, so unless a separate bicycle path is installed, bicycles must be driven on the road. Therefore, when attempting to cross a regular crosswalk on a bicycle, you must get off the bicycle and walk while dragging it. However, because these points are not properly observed, accidents occur frequently. If a traffic accident occurs while crossing a crosswalk on a bicycle, will the cyclist be protected as a pedestrian? We would like to look at the criteria for judging pedestrians through this related incident.2. The standard for determining whether a cyclist can be classified as a pedestrian. First, let's look at the legal issues in a case involving a violation of the Special Act on Traffic Accidents (causing injuries) that I handled in the past. In this case, the defendant, while turning right, hit a cyclist in his 70s who was crossing the crosswalk at a green pedestrian signal, causing 14 weeks of injuries. Normally, if an accident occurs while riding a bicycle, it is treated as a vehicle-to-vehicle accident, but in this case, the prosecutor recognized the victim as a pedestrian, not a car, and prosecuted him. The law on which it was based was Article 13-2, Paragraph 4, No. 1 of the Road Traffic Act (Taoist Act). This provision contains an exception: ‘Children, the elderly, and the physically disabled may ride on the sidewalk if they are driving a bicycle.’ B. The prosecutor at issue argued that a guilty verdict should be made, citing the exception clause. To explain this, a traffic accident involving a child riding a bicycle while walking on a crosswalk was presented as an example. In addition, it was emphasized that there are many cases in which similar cases were punished for violating the Special Act on Traffic Accidents (Seoul Northern District Court 2018 Goyak 877, Uijeongbu District Court 2019 Godan 2891 ruling, etc.). In addition, a precedent stating that children riding bicycles need to be protected in the same way as pedestrians was cited as a reason (Seoul Southern District Court 2024 Gohap 247 ruling). If some rulings have ruled that children on bicycles should be recognized as pedestrians and protected, the meaning is that there is no reason why the elderly and the disabled should not also be considered pedestrians. In addition, the concepts of ‘sidewalk’ and ‘crosswalk’ also became the main basis. The prosecution raised its voice and said that sidewalks include crosswalks. Therefore, in accordance with Article 13-2, Paragraph 4, Item 1 of the Taoist Act, children, elderly people, etc. who cross the crosswalk by bicycle should be regarded as pedestrians. Summary of Decision The first trial court dismissed the indictment, ruling that the victim could not be considered a pedestrian on the crosswalk pursuant to Article 27 (1) and Article 13-2 (6) of the Taoist Act because the accident occurred while he was crossing the crosswalk while riding a bicycle. In particular, since the law distinguishes between sidewalks and crosswalks, it was held that it cannot be interpreted to mean that children and the elderly can ride bicycles on crosswalks. In the case of general sidewalks, bicycles are allowed to ride slowly and stop temporarily as long as they do not interfere with pedestrian traffic. On the other hand, crosswalks are completely separate from the concept of sidewalks because they require people to get off their bicycles. The judgment of the second trial court was no different. The second trial upheld the original judgment, finding that there was no mistake in misunderstanding the legal principles claimed by the prosecutors. Commentary The prosecution argued that children are protected in the same way as pedestrians, and that there is no reason to treat children and the elderly differently. However, interpreting a victim who crossed a crosswalk while riding a bicycle as a pedestrian simply because the victim is an elderly person is unacceptable as it violates the principle of prohibiting inference and expansion of interpretation, which is a derivative principle of the legal principle of criminal law, which is a major principle of criminal law. In addition, ‘sidewalk’, commonly called sidewalk, is an abbreviation for pedestrian road and is a road used for the passage of pedestrians. Therefore, it can be said that its nature is different from a ‘crosswalk’, which is a pedestrian facility installed on the road to allow pedestrians to cross safely. Therefore, the legal principles based on the prosecution could not be applied to this case. In this way, if a traffic accident occurs while crossing a crosswalk while riding a bicycle, the cyclist cannot be protected as a pedestrian. Also, in this case, the actions of the perpetrator in the case do not fall under the 12 gross negligence provisions of the Special Act on Traffic Accidents, so if an agreement is reached with the victim, the indictment can be dismissed.[View full article] Law Leader - [Column] Traffic accident while crossing a crosswalk while riding a bicycle... What are the criteria for judging pedestrians? (Shortcut) Korea Law Daily - Traffic accident involving an elderly person crossing a crosswalk while riding a bicycle... What are the criteria for judging a pedestrian? (Shortcut)

A gas station employee who was put on trial for issuing false cash receipts to his son's business was found not guilty. The Ulsan District Court announced on the 19th that it had acquitted Mr. A, in his 70s, who was indicted on charges of malfeasance, etc. on the 15th of last month. While working at a gas station run by Mr. B for about four years starting in May, he was accused of not selling oil and issuing false cash receipts worth about 10 million won. The cash receipt was issued to the business operated by Mr. A's son. Mr. A denied the charges. He claimed that he actually filled his wife's vehicle with gas and only issued it in bulk. At the same time, Mr. A emphasized that he had never personally used the customer's gas money. On the other hand, Mr. B argued that there was no record of actual oil sales on the date that Mr. A issued the cash receipt. The court found Mr. A not guilty. This is because it was judged that there was insufficient evidence to conclude that Mr. A had issued false cash receipts. The court explained, “Even if the time when Mr. A issued the cash receipt and the sales records in the gas station system are not completely consistent, we cannot rule out the possibility that Mr. A actually filled the gas, and it cannot be seen as intentional or seeking profit.” In addition, “Mr. A’s son is a tax-exempt business operator and is not subject to value-added tax refund or deduction,” and added, “There is not much reason for Mr. A to take the risk of issuing a cash receipt to his son’s business.” Acting as Mr. A’s legal representative, Attorney Lee Il-kwon of Daeryun Law Firm said, “For the issuance of a cash receipt itself to constitute a crime of professional breach of trust, there must be clear property gain and damage to others,” and added, “We were able to obtain an acquittal by explaining in detail the specific procedures for the issuance method and whether there was actual damage.” Reporter Park Jae-gwan (paksunbi@fnnews.com)[View full article] Selling oil to my son's business... 70-year-old not guilty for issuing false cash receipts (link)

A 40-year-old academy director who was sent to the country on charges of hiring a student under the pretext of sharing the academy's shares and stealing wages was acquitted. According to the legal community on the 19th, the Ulsan District Prosecutor's Office decided not to indict Mr. A, a 40-year-old who was accused of fraud and child abuse in May. Mr. A has been deceiving his student B by pretending to share the academy's shares for about four years since November 2019. He is accused of failing to pay wages after entrusting him with tasks such as lecturing, driving a car, and cleaning the academy. There is also a charge of child abuse. When Mr. B was a high school student, he took him to a drinking party and encouraged him to drink. Mr. A denied the charges, saying that it was Mr. B who first expressed his desire to work as an academy instructor. “At the time, it was difficult to hire Mr. B right away, so we encouraged him to earn credits through the credit bank system until he was 25, and during that period, we trained him as an instructor.” Regarding the child abuse charge, he said, "I heard that Mr. B often drank alcohol when he was in high school, so I just said that I would buy him alcohol if that was the case." The prosecution dismissed the charge. In the case of 'non-payment of wages,' it was determined that there was a prior agreement between the two. It was judged that Mr. He said, “It is difficult to say that it was an expression to deceive the victim.” Regarding the child abuse charge, he also judged, “If you consider the statements of other students who drank together at the time, it does not appear that it was a forced drinking party because only Mr. “We were able to obtain acquittal by comprehensively explaining the relationship, salary system, and foundation of trust,” he explained. Jeong Eui-jin (jej88@ikbc.co.kr)[View full article] “I trained the instructor.” The 40-year-old director was cleared of charges for hiring a student penniless for 4 years (link)

“As much as we respect corporate autonomy, I hope that consumer rights will also be protected. I hope that starting with this ruling, the two values ​​will find a balance.” On the 18th, Mr. A, an employee of Daeryun Law Firm, and lawyer Da-eun Kim said this. The Seoul Central District Court recently ruled that the terms and conditions of the accommodation platform Nol Universe (Yanolja), which stipulates that refunds cannot be made more than 10 minutes after completing a reservation for accommodation products, are unfair and therefore invalid. Mr. A was the plaintiff and Attorney Kim acted as the representative and brought out this ruling. The story is as follows. Mr. A, who was in charge of business trips in Daeryun, reserved accommodation through Yanolja. However, the schedule was changed and I announced my intention to cancel my reservation two hours later, but Yanolja informed me that a refund was not possible. The reason was that if you do not cancel within 10 minutes after completing the reservation, a cancellation fee equivalent to 100% of the reservation deposit will be charged according to the regulations. Accordingly, Daeryun decided to file a lawsuit to return the unfair profits. This is to raise issues about terms and conditions that infringe consumer rights and receive legal judgment. The E-Commerce Act guarantees consumers a 7-day cancellation period, but some industries, such as lodging and aviation, customarily view exceptions without making specific judgments for each case, so they believe that only consumers are bearing the brunt of the damage. During the lawsuit, Yanolja argued that mail order brokers are not subject to the relevant provisions of the E-Commerce Act and therefore do not have to be responsible for refunding fees. However, Attorney Kim countered that Yanolja went beyond being an intermediary and actually engaged in active sales activities as a seller. To prove this, Attorney Kim went through the process of reserving and canceling products from Yanolja several times. At the same time, if you reserve a room at the published rate, you can cancel without a fee until the actual stay, but we confirmed that a full refund is not possible for the product in question, even though the difference is less than 20,000 won than the published rate. Based on this, the trial emphasized that it was significantly unreasonable in light of general common sense. As a result of the trial, the court ruled that Yanolja was a mail order seller or a ‘mail order intermediary who is a mail order seller.’ In addition, the refund policy was deemed invalid as it was unfavorable to the customer and constituted an unfair term, and the full refund was ordered to be paid to Mr. A. Daeryun's side said that if only the status of an intermediary is recognized as in existing precedents, it results in evading responsibility for various business activities, and it appears that the court sympathized with the problem of this unreasonable structure. Attorney Kim said, "This ruling does not mean that all terms and conditions that are converted to non-refundable after a certain period of time are considered invalid. However, the prevailing perception has been that even if a problem is raised with similar terms and conditions, the possibility of winning is small, but this ruling has confirmed the possibility of redress for consumers' rights." Daeryun plans to file a class action lawsuit on behalf of consumers who have suffered damage due to Yanolja's terms and conditions. Currently, criminal complaints, accusations, and civil lawsuits are being filed on behalf of victims regarding the leak of SKT's personal information. Reporter Jeong Cheol-wook[View full article] Seoul Newspaper - Law firm puts the brakes on Yanolja’s terms and conditions of ‘no refunds after 10 minutes of reservation’… “I hope this becomes an opportunity to balance consumer protection and corporate autonomy” (link) Money S - ‘Yanolja refund’ win case Attorney Da-eun Kim “I wanted to find ‘rights’ more than money” (Go to here)

Many clients think of filing a fraud complaint as one of the solutions when they do not receive the money they lent. However, in order for fraud to be established, it must be clearly proven that the debtor did not have the intention or ability to fulfill the obligation from the beginning. It is difficult to be recognized as a fraud simply by not paying back the money, and there is also a risk of being counter-indicted for making a false accusation. In the same case, the first action you can take is to send a certificate of contents. This mainly contains the statement, "If the debt is not met within a certain period of time, legal action will be taken, so let's resolve it amicably before then." Proof of contents puts considerable psychological pressure on the other party, so there are many cases where the problem is resolved at this stage even if a lawsuit is not filed. Nevertheless, if the other party does not pay the debt, you must prepare for a lawsuit. The idea is to file a civil lawsuit, obtain a favorable ruling, and begin compulsory execution procedures. The most important step in this process is to accurately identify the debtor's enforceable assets. If assets are not identified or are unclear, you can check the details of assets such as real estate, deposits, security deposits, salaries, etc. by requesting property specification or property inquiry through the court. However, the possibility that the other party intentionally conceals the property or transfers it to a third party cannot be ruled out. In this case, safety measures must be put in place by applying for preservation measures such as provisional seizure and injunction in advance. So, if the creditor has already embezzled the property in the name of a third party, is there no way? In this case, a possible solution is a 'creditor cancellation lawsuit'. The creditor's previous actions can be invalidated and the relevant property returned to the debtor's name. In particular, Article 404 of the Civil Code guarantees the 'creditor's right of subrogation' so that a creditor can exercise the debtor's rights on behalf of the debtor. In some cases, this right can be a more effective and faster method of collecting claims than general compulsory execution. Let's take a case I actually handled as an example. The client was a creditor who lent Company A about 1 billion won. The problem here was that Company A did not have property that could be executed. Company A had established Company B to acquire Company C and had handed over a large amount of funds. On the other hand, Company C owned golf course land worth 50 billion won on Jeju Island. Company C was ultimately acquired by Company A through Company B, but because Company C was a legally separate corporation from Company A, it was not easy for the client to directly touch Company C's assets. At this time, the author used the legal principle of 'creditor's right of subrogation'. If company A gave money to company B, and company B lent money to company C, the client, who is company A's creditor, is considered to be able to subrogate company A's creditor's right of subrogation, that is, 'company A's right to provisionally seize property owned by company C on behalf of company B, the debtor.' Although there was some trial and error due to the lack of precedent at the time, the court eventually made a decision to cite provisional seizure of Company C's golf course site, and the bond was fully recovered. Legal procedures and securing evidence should be prioritized over simple emotional response in bond recovery. It is important to remember that if you move outside the legal boundaries out of fear of not receiving money, you may face greater disadvantages in the future. Our Civil Act and Civil Procedure Act provide a variety of rights relief methods, but each system has different requirements and application methods, and there are also deadlines such as statutes of limitations and filing periods. Therefore, it is important to determine the appropriate means for each individual case and apply it in a timely manner, and it is most necessary to receive professional legal assistance at an early stage. Small and Medium Business Team[View full article] It is absolutely difficult to commit fraud… ‘Debt collection technology’ to ensure you get the money you deserve (link)

Daeryun Law Firm announced on the 18th that it has hired former Senior Secretary for Economic Affairs Ahn Il-hwan (32nd civil service examination) as an advisor. Advisor Ahn graduated from Masan High School in Gyeongnam and the Department of Trade at Seoul National University, and received a master's degree in economics from the University of Ottawa in Canada and a doctorate in public administration from the Catholic University of Korea. After passing the civil service examination in 1989 and entering public service, Advisor Ahn worked at the Economic Planning Board and the Ministry of Planning and Budget, and built his career as a budget expert by being dispatched to the International Bank for Reconstruction and Development (IBRD) in the U.S. In addition, after the launch of the Ministry of Strategy and Finance in 2008, he held key positions such as the head of the Ministry of Land, Transport and Maritime Affairs, budget system, and general budget management. In particular, during the period when the Korean economy was experiencing difficulties due to the global financial crisis, he oversaw the preparation of the supplementary budget as the head of the budget system department. Afterwards, he held major positions such as the Ministry of National Defense's Planning and Budget Officer and the Ministry of Strategy and Finance's spokesperson, and then rose to the position of Director of the Budget Office and Second Vice Minister, and in 2021, he was selected as Senior Secretary to the President for Economic Affairs. Advisor Ahn said, "I have experienced numerous cases in the fiscal policy sector, including leading the preparation of the super budget during COVID-19," and "I have worked with corporate customers in Daeryun, etc. “We will do our best to identify acute conflicts of interest and clearly resolve them,” said Daeryun Kim Kuk-il, CEO of Daeryun. Eunhye Lee (zhses3@joseilbo.com)[View full article] Jose Ilbo - Daeryun Law Firm Recruits Former Senior Secretary for Economic Affairs Ahn Il-hwan (Click here) Blotter - [Law Firm ON] Daeryun recruits former Senior Secretary for Economic Affairs Ahn Il-hwan (Click here) Korea Economic TV - Daeryun Law Firm Recruits Former Senior Secretary for Economic Affairs Ahn Il-hwan (Click here) Legal Times - [Law Firm iN] Recruitment of Dae-ryun and Ahn Il-hwan, former senior economic advisors (link)

A worker who suffered a finger amputation accident while working at a factory filed a lawsuit for damages against the company's representative, but lost. According to the legal community on the 17th, the Busan District Court ruled on the 15th of last month that Mr. A, a worker in his 30s who was a food company worker, lost the plaintiff's lawsuit against CEO B. In 2023, while working at a food factory, Mr. A suffered an accident in which his finger was caught in a vegetable grinder and cut off. Accordingly, Mr. A claimed that Mr. B was forcing him to work. The lawsuit was filed claiming that Mr. B was responsible for violating the duty of care by not providing safety or job training. However, Mr. B refuted Mr. A's claim, saying that sufficient training on how to use the grinder and safety rules had been provided. He also claimed that Mr. A suffered an accident while arbitrarily trying to remove food residue without turning off the power of the machine. The court said, "If you look at the instructions for using the machine, if the grinder stops working due to overload, you must turn it off and solve the problem. “This information was attached to the front of the shredder, so the workers were fully aware of the contents,” he said. He ruled in favor of Mr. B, saying, “The defendant made the workers, including the plaintiff, aware of the usage rules every morning, and the plaintiff also operated the machine according to the manual until the accident.” He also stated the reason for sentencing, saying, “The accident appears to have occurred while the plaintiff was working in violation of the safety rules.” Attorney Jong-Hoon Han of Daeryun Law Firm, who represented Mr. B, said “Mr. A has been using the shredder without any problems for over a year immediately after joining the company, and none of the other workers who have been in charge of the same work have suffered any injuries,” he explained. “Since the accident occurred due to working against work instructions, it should be seen that there was no intention or negligence on the part of Mr. B.” Jeong Eui-jin (jej88@ikbc.co.kr)[View full article] A worker whose finger was amputated while working filed a lawsuit against the representative, but lost the case (link)

A man accused of sexually assaulting and committing adultery with a woman in his 30s on several occasions received a reduced sentence in the appeals court for a man accused of sexually assaulting and molesting his intellectually disabled cousin. The Busan High Court sentenced Mr. The original trial was overturned and he was sentenced to three years in prison and five years of probation. He was also ordered to receive probation and attend 40 hours of sexual violence treatment classes. Mr. A was accused of forcibly molesting and committing adultery with his cousin B, who has a brain lesion, several times from 2019 to 2023. The first trial court sentenced Mr. A to four years in prison. The court explained, “The crime is more serious because it was a crime against a disabled victim,” and “The victim must have also suffered considerable pain.” Mr. A filed an appeal on the grounds of unfair sentencing. The reason was that although it was true that he had sexual intercourse with Mr. B, it was not forced. In addition, Mr. A's side also emphasized that Mr. B expressed his intention not to be punished during the appeal process. The appeals court accepted Mr. A's argument. The court explained, “The defendant has no history of criminal punishment and appears to have made efforts to reach an amicable resolution, such as depositing consolation money for the victim.” He added, “The victim also actively expressed that he does not wish to punish the defendant.” Daeryun Law Firm, the legal representative of Mr. A, said, “We actually explained the friendly relationship between the two and emphasized that this should be taken into account,” adding, “We can bring about a lenient result by explaining favorable factors, such as the possibility of Mr. A’s rehabilitation, from various angles.” “There was,” he explained. Reporter Kim Jong-cheol (jckim99@sportsseoul.com)[View full article] My cousin, who suffered from brain lesions, committed adultery for several years... ‘Sentence commuted’ through appeal hearing (link)

In 2015, the Supreme Court's plenary body declared the success fee agreement in criminal cases invalid on the grounds that it was contrary to Article 103 of the Civil Act, that is, good morals and other social order. The ruling at the time reflected social criticism of the courtesy of military officials, distrust of the judicial system, and the demands of the times to ensure integrity. However, as the Supreme Court itself stated, whether a legal act violates social order must be judged based on the circumstances of the time and social norms at the time the legal act was performed. The Republic of Korea today is in a clearly different legal and social environment than in 2015. The institutional foundation, including the revision of the Public Official Ethics Act and the enactment of the Anti-Graft and Corruption Act, has already been established, and the monitoring and control of courtesy to all officials has ensured institutional effectiveness. The public's sensitivity to the law has improved dramatically, so the common belief that the judgment of judicial institutions will be distorted simply because there is a success reward is losing its persuasiveness. Rather, legally allowing success conservatism and regulating it transparently may be a way to increase trust in the judiciary. The Supreme Court was concerned that criminal success compensation could distort judicial justice as a price for the outcome, but this is an interpretation that confuses the nature of the contract with public ethics. Justice is realized through the design and implementation of systems, and is not damaged by the act of receiving compensation itself. Success fees already exist informally in practice, and it is in line with the reality of the legal market to foster them and manage them under transparent contracts. Recently, even within the Korean Bar Association and bar associations, the perception of the complete ban on criminal success compensation is a measure that is divorced from reality is spreading. The Korean Bar Association has actually been operating a standard contract based on the premise of criminal success compensation, and many lawyers are evaluating that it is possible to operate realistic cases through this. This should be read as a discussion of institutional improvement that goes beyond the restoration of freedom of contract and reflects the structural reality of legal services. The lack of institutional consistency regarding criminal compensation is also felt in practical settings. The people do not want to entrust their fate to a public defender who receives an allowance of 300,000 won, like in a movie scene. Just as there is a line in the drama, “The money you should never save in life is lawyer’s fees,” there is a growing awareness that the right to defense cannot be fully exercised with only low allowances and limited assistance. This reveals the structural limitations of the public defense system and symbolically shows why a result-oriented private contract structure should function as an option. Ideals that ignore reality do not gain sympathy. We must implement justice in institutional reality. Criminal success compensation is a device that effectively guarantees the ‘right to receive assistance from a lawyer’, a fundamental right under the Constitution. The high deposit is an absolute barrier to exercising the right to defense, and the success fee is the only realistic structure that can compensate for this. Today's criminal justice stands on two axes: not only the integrity of judicial institutions but also the guarantee of the people's actual right to defense. The public interest role of lawyers must be performed fairly regardless of the outcome, but the logic that receiving reasonable compensation based on performance is against social order is no longer convincing. Rather, the institutionalization of criminal success compensation is the only institutional device that provides real options to the public and allows lawyers to provide more responsible assistance. In order to escape from a structure where one has no choice but to choose low-quality defense due to the burden of down payment, the legal validity of success fee must now be reexamined from the beginning. Park Dong-il, CEO of Daeryun Law Firm, said, "Criminal success compensation is not a contract to buy justice. It is an institutional means that citizens can choose to achieve justice. Under the conditions of fair contracts, transparent standards, and strict enforcement, criminal success compensation should not be a regression in judicial justice, but rather a restoration of public rights and the direction of practical judicial reform demanded by the times." Reporter Jin Ga-young (lawissue) (news@lawissue.co.kr)[View full article] Criminal success compensation needs to be discussed again to restore public rights (link)

Following SK Telecom, suspicions of personal information leakage were also raised at YES24. YES24 stated that “there was no personal information leakage” immediately after becoming aware of the ransomware attack on the 9th, but the seriousness of the matter was revealed when the Personal Information Protection Committee detected abnormal member information inquiry circumstances and began an investigation. This incident is not limited to a simple hacking incident. Repeated personal information leaks raise fundamental questions about the actual responsibility of major domestic companies for personal information protection and whether the institutional response system is functioning properly. In particular, both SK Telecom and YES24 had received government-run ISMS (Information Security Management System) or ISMS-P (Integrated Certification for Personal Information Protection) certification. ISMS-P is a system that examines and certifies that a company has certain managerial and technical protection measures in place. However, this system does not evaluate whether a hacking incident occurred or whether the company fulfilled its actual responsibilities after the incident. The damage relief system and practical measures to prevent recurrence are unrelated to the validity of certification. As a result, as long as the requirements are met, the certification is maintained. The problem is that this certification is easily abused by the company's logic of immunity after the accident, saying, “We were operating a system that was certified by the government.” Certification for prevention and strengthening responsibility is actually used as a tool for ‘fulfilling formal responsibility’ when an accident occurs. The certification system is functioning differently from its original intent. If we are relying on a system that neither prevents accidents nor strengthens responsibility, citizens will inevitably end up thinking, “National certification does not protect me.” The system exists, but its effectiveness is weak, and the problem is even more serious in that it is a structure that allows companies to avoid responsibility even after an accident occurs. Overseas are different. A U.S. federal court ordered Israel's NSO Group to pay approximately $167 million in punitive damages in a case involving unauthorized infringement of WhatsApp users' devices. US telecommunications company T-Mobile also paid a multi-million dollar class action settlement after a large-scale personal information leak. The law and system are structured to actually hold companies accountable. On the other hand, Korea is still limited to mild punishment. This is because administrative fines, corrective orders, and formal supervision are all that are involved. In civil lawsuits, the burden of proof is excessively placed on the victim, and the level of compensation is far from reality. A more serious problem is that some media outlets and large law firms are spreading the logic that "claiming compensation for personal information leaks is of no use," creating an atmosphere that causes citizens to give up exercising their rights. In order to crack this structure, Daeryun Law Firm is pursuing class action lawsuits against large corporations for personal information leaks. This decision is by no means a favorable choice if viewed solely from the profit logic of the legal market. However, since its establishment, Daeryun has placed the reason for the existence of legal services not on ‘profit’ but on ‘practical realization of citizens’ rights.’ This class action lawsuit is also an extension of that. Daeryun dispersed the legal market centered on the metropolitan area to a regional basis and established a nationwide branch office so that all citizens can receive high-quality legal services. We partnered with large law firms in the U.S. and Japan to incorporate advanced legal systems in Korea, and introduced a customer service system (AS system) that allows for customer satisfaction surveys, replacement of lawyers, and even refunds. This SK Telecom class action lawsuit is also an exercise to prove that such a structural experiment is feasible in reality. There is no reason why the personal information of Korean citizens should be less important than that of American or European citizens. What is needed now is the introduction of a punitive damages system, strengthening the effectiveness of the class action system, and establishing a legal foundation that can lead to actual corporate responsibility. The court must also present clear standards and a strong message so that companies accept personal information protection as the ‘essence of management’ rather than an ‘optional’. This lawsuit is not just a case asking for the legal responsibility of one company. This should be the starting point for laws and systems to officially declare that personal information is a fundamental right under the Constitution, not subject to technical management. Personal information is a valuable asset. The rights of the people should never be given away at a cheap price.[View full article] Law Leader - [Contribution] National certification has become a corporate impunity, a law is needed for ‘real responsibility’ (link) Korea Law Daily - [Contribution] National certification has become a corporate impunity, a law is needed for ‘true responsibility’ (link)