Press Coverage

In 2002, when MB was mayor of Seoul, he first surfaced, criticizing the intervention of state agencies and the use of macro programs as a "threat to democracy"... The cautious view on 'freedom of expression' is also spreading amid controversy over comment manipulation by the far-right history education group Livac School. Livac School is an organization named after the last names of former President Syngman Rhee and former President Park Chung-hee, respectively, and is suspected of trying to create public opinion favorable to the conservative camp and influence various elections through Internet comment activities three years ago. On the 4th, three days after the incident was announced, the police began a full-scale investigation, seizing and searching the residence and office of Son Hyo-sook, CEO of Revac School. Online public opinion manipulation incidents such as the Revac School incident have continued since the early 2000s when computers became popular. Online spaces are the perfect place to push public opinion on various issues in a specific direction. First of all, Internet portal sites and communities have enormous potential in that they are spaces used by hundreds of thousands or millions of people. Moreover, the anonymity that is a characteristic of online makes it difficult to identify the true nature of public opinion manipulation. This means that if some forces systematically carry out posting or commenting activities, it can create an optical illusion as if this is the actual trend of public opinion. The damage is truly enormous. It may hinder the free formation of opinions by voters and ultimately lead to distorted election results. Manipulation of public opinion threatens and undermines the foundation of democracy. Is there any way to prevent this in advance? We looked for appropriate response measures by looking at the patterns of online public opinion manipulation incidents that have occurred in the political world and cases of criminal punishment.‘Public opinion manipulation’ regardless of whether conservative or progressiveOnline public opinion manipulation first surfaced in 2002. Soon after, Mayor Lee Myung-bak of Seoul, who took office on July 1 of that year, was suspected of trying to create 'pro-Lee Myung-bak' public opinion by hiring part-time workers. This is because, in a situation where the mayor was embroiled in a series of rumors, hundreds of posts defending Mayor Lee were posted in the civil liberties discussion room on the Seoul City Hall website in just a few days. Ahead of the 2004 general election, a prospective candidate in the Uri Party's primary was arrested on charges of paying college students to post articles supporting him on the Internet. The National Intelligence Service's comment manipulation incident, which came to light in late 2012, most clearly demonstrated the seriousness of online public opinion manipulation. This was an incident in which the National Intelligence Service directly operated a ‘civilian comment unit’ during the Lee Myung-bak (MB) administration and attempted to manipulate public opinion. In May 2009, when the approval ratings of the MB government hit rock bottom due to protests against the import of U.S. beef, then-NIS Director Won Se-hoon, who was four months into his term, established a 'cyber outskirt team' under the NIS North Korea Psychological Warfare Division and had them post internet posts and comments defending the government and the conservative camp and defaming the opposition party and progressive civic groups. The size of the cyber external team, which initially started with 9 teams, increased to 30 teams (3,500 people in total) in 2012, when the general and presidential elections were held. In this case, former Director Won was sentenced to four years in prison and four years of suspension for violating the Public Official Election Act and the National Intelligence Service Act. The 'temptation' of manipulating public opinion did not discriminate between the left and the right. A representative example is the so-called ‘Druking incident’, which caused great harm to the progressive camp in 2018. It was an incident in which a group of men who were active online under the pen name 'Druking' used a macro program between 2014 and 2018 to manipulate the number of 'likes' or 'dislikes' in comments on news articles on portal sites to favor the Democratic Party of Korea. It was revealed that Gyeongsangnam-do governor at the time, Kim Kyung-soo, a close associate of former President Moon Jae-in, had conspired, and he was eventually sentenced to two years in prison and lost his position as governor.① Macro ② Organizational ③ Punishment must be proven to be quid pro quoAs in previous cases, criminal punishment for manipulating public opinion is possible. Illegality is recognized if an organized activity is carried out, such as using a macro manipulation program (alleged computer interference with business) or installing a similar organization to influence the election even though it is not an official election office (crime of election fraud under the Public Official Election Act). In addition, even if a person promises compensation and instructs to manipulate public opinion, it falls under Article 230 of the Public Official Election Act (crime of buying and inducing interest). However, not all acts related to manipulating public opinion are subject to judicial processing. For example, the act of sharing a specific comment or community post and simply encouraging people to click on a recommendation or leave a comment (so-called 'marking') is recognized as 'freedom of expression' in a broad sense. Livac School also claims, “Writing comments and clicking ‘Like’ or ‘Dislike’ are clearly legal and constitutionally guaranteed acts of citizen political participation.” Seong-Hoon Ahn, a lawyer at Beopseung Law Firm, explained, "If a small number of people engage in comment-related activities on a small scale, the charge of obstruction of business may not be recognized. However, if the scale reaches a significant level and the targeted comments are exposed to the top for a significant period of time, there is a possibility that a crime can be established. Portal sites also do not restrict users' participation in the 'simple coordinate shooting' style." It is viewed as a free expression of collective opinion. A Naver official said, “It may change depending on the results of the investigation, but it is not easy to view the act of multiple people clicking ‘recommend’ on comments using their own accounts as obstruction of business.” An official from Kakao, which operates the portal Daum, also said, "It is difficult for a business operator to judge whether public opinion has been manipulated and take preemptive legal action simply by expressing a collective opinion online." Therefore, the keys to determining illegality in this Revac School incident are expected to be 'quid pro quo' and 'organization'. According to data submitted by Naver on the 5th by Choi Min-hee, Chairman of the Science, Technology, Information, Broadcasting and Communications Committee of the National Assembly, Naver said, "After analyzing the login records of nine Revac School member accounts, we confirmed some cases where accounts with different names were accessed from the same IP." This means that multiple accounts were accessed from one computer. In a phone call with the Hankook Ilbo, Naver explained, "We are independently checking whether accounts have been transferred or rented in the name of others, and additional information will be revealed through investigative agencies." He added, "It is not possible to determine whether public opinion has been manipulated simply by the fact that multiple accounts are connected from the same IP. However, if one person writes (multiple) comments using another person's account, there may be a potential for problems." Naver's terms of use stipulate that "accounts cannot be sold, transferred, or rented to other people."“The government should step in and strengthen regulations on manipulating public opinion.”Experts argue that the government must step in and strengthen regulations on manipulating public opinion. Yoo Hyeon-jae, a professor of journalism and broadcasting at Sogang University, said, "Considering the rapidly changing media environment, there is no legal system that can respond appropriately to it." Professor Yoo explained, "From the portal's perspective, it is beneficial in terms of traffic (number of visitors), so there is not much incentive to (actively) prevent the act of manipulating public opinion." He added, "The government should first present guidelines such as 'disadvantages when manipulating public opinion' and proceed by requesting these from portals." However, there are also cautious views. This is because defining the meaning of public opinion manipulation broadly has the potential to harm freedom of expression. Lawyer Jae-young Yoo of Daeryun Law Firm said, "Even if specific punishment provisions are prepared for manipulating public opinion, it is difficult to clarify the elements, and issues of legal punishment will arise in the future," and emphasized, "There must be a social consensus first on the extent to which Internet public opinion formation and public opinion-leading behavior will be punished." Reporter Oh Se-woon (cloud5@hankookilbo.com)[View full article] "From the National Intelligence Service and Druking to Livac School... the dark history of 'online public opinion manipulation' (link)

Daeryun Law Firm announced on the 5th that it will respond to new legal demands, such as strengthening the rights and interests of small business owners and digital transformation of the food industry, centered on its corporate law group. This is because, amid recent lawsuits in the franchise industry due to disputes over franchise fees and head office owner risk, related demand is expected to increase as President Lee Jae-myung announced that he will overhaul the system to guarantee collective bargaining rights to franchisees. The purpose of this pledge is to legally codify the consultation process between the headquarters and franchisees, which has been left to its own discretion until now. Considering this situation, Daeryun decided to provide multifaceted legal support centered on corporate lawyers who are familiar with corporate laws such as the Fair Trade Act and the Franchise Business Act. If a dispute arises, the group plans to conduct a case by conducting a preliminary review and forming a team of 3 to 20 experts in each field, including corporate law, fair trade, finance, and labor, depending on the case. The corporate legal group is headed by attorney Kye-jun Son (36th class of the Judicial Research and Training Institute), who worked at the Fair Trade Commission and handled cases such as Homeplus' violation of the Franchise Business Act and the corporate combination case of SK Telecom and SK Broadband's acquisition of T-Broad. Also participating are Shin Jong-soo, head of the Corporate Advisory Center (31st class), who has expertise in sales, acquisitions, and transactions, and Kim Won-sang, head of the Rehabilitation and Bankruptcy Center (43rd class), who represented the franchise owner in the Korea Pizza Hut unfair profit return lawsuit. In addition, lawyer Oh Sang-wan (37th class), who has extensive experience in corporate criminal, civil, and administrative cases. The corporate legal group includes Attorney Bang In-tae (41st class), a former in-house lawyer at a large corporation and an expert in human resources and labor; Kim Yu-jeong, who specializes in taxation and administrative litigation; Ji Min-hee, who advises on fair trade and M&A; and Kim Seo-young, who has extensive experience representing corporate rehabilitation and bankruptcy. In addition, we collaborate in real time with experts such as accountants, tax accountants, and labor attorneys as needed. Key experts include accountant Park Soo-jin in the field of finance and accounting, tax accountant Lim Jeong-oh, who performs corporate tax adjustment and consulting, and labor attorney Nam Seo-hye, who has handled a variety of labor cases. Considering the nature of corporate legal affairs, which involves many mid-to-large-sized cases, an internal system was also established to increase case processing efficiency, such as establishing a special execution headquarters that commands cases led by the headquarters. The headquarters is led by lawyers Cho Young-gon (16th class) and Yeo Sang-won (17th class) with 40 years of experience and manages criminal, civil, and administrative cases. Based on an accurate initial diagnosis, we plan to deploy professional lawyers to smoothly respond to medium to large-sized cases. Daeryun CEO Kim Kuk-il said, “In a situation where disputes between franchisees and headquarters frequently occur, inquiries for related legal advice continue to come in, and in addition to franchise lawsuits, corporate-related criminal, administrative, and tax cases are also increasing. Due to the prolonged economic downturn, both companies and franchise owners are experiencing difficulties in management, so a mutually beneficial solution is needed. “Based on our strengths, we will do our best for the benefit of our customers in any case.” Reporter Jeong Cheol-wook[View full article] Daeryun Law Firm Strengthens Franchise Dispute Response Centered by Corporate Legal Experts (Click here)

Daeryun Law Firm (CEOs Kim Kuk-il and Ko Byeong-jun) is the only major law firm in Korea that operates a debt collection center, with Lee Sang-kwon, Korea's first lawyer specializing in debt collection, serving as the center's director. Currently, in Korea, only lawyers and credit information companies licensed by the Financial Supervisory Service can conduct debt collection work, and Daeryun is the only large law firm specializing in this field. The background of the creation of the Daeryun Debt Collection Center lies in the values ​​pursued by Daeryun. The vision that ‘anyone can receive high-quality legal services anytime, anywhere’ has also been applied to the field of debt collection. It enabled clients to use the services they needed through lawyers in a legal and efficient manner. What stands out most about the center is the collaboration of experts in multiple fields. Experts with extensive experience, such as lawyers, paralegals, tax accountants, and accountants, provide prompt and accurate results. The center is spearheaded by Lee Sang-kwon, a lawyer specializing in debt collection (31st class of the Judicial Research and Training Institute). He started working as a lawyer in 2002 and has been in charge of overseas debt collection at TCM Korea Law Office. This lawyer entered the debt collection field in earnest in 2011, and after much effort, he achieved the feat of registering debt collection as a specialty with the Korean Bar Association (Bar Association) for the first time in Korea. He is considered an authority in the field of debt collection, having served as the first president of the Korean Bar Association's Debt Collection Lawyers Association and currently serving as an advisor. Attorney Lee, who took over as head of the center, said, "It is time to take a preemptive response as interest in collection is increasing," adding, "By delegating tasks to a professional lawyer, efficient debt collection is possible as they can proceed from simple collection work to complex legal procedures. Various effects are expected by allowing the use of human and material resources at the law firm level." revealed. A lawyer’s debt collection goes through several steps. In addition, this series of processes requires legal means, from proof of contents to payment orders and seizures, and it is important to receive professional help from a lawyer. When asked about the advantages of Daeryun Debt Collection Center, the lawyer responded that the combination of debt collection and litigation was impressive. He said, “Specializing in the field of debt collection means that we have everything from relatively simple tasks such as agreements and proof of contents to general litigation capabilities,” and added, “We are creating synergy by combining expertise in the debt collection and litigation fields.” The close joint response system with Daeryun Security Group is also worth noting. Just as there are plaintiffs and defendants in a lawsuit, there is also a side collecting the debt and a side receiving the debt in debt collection. Daeryun Security Group provides a variety of services, including accompanying professional security guards, to clients suffering from illegal debt collection. Attorney Lee explained, “This can be said to be a new change as we have accomplished something that has not been attempted in the industry. In the case of illegal debt collection, a one-stop solution can be provided in connection with security services.” Reporter Park Jun-sik (parkjs@wowtv.co.kr)[View full article] Korea Economic Daily TV - Daeryun, law firm's only debt collection center operation... “Combining expertise in the litigation field” (link) Sejeong Ilbo - Daeryun operates the only law firm debt collection center... Combining experts such as lawyers and accountants (link) Financial News - Daeryun operates the only law firm debt collection center… “Combined with expertise in the litigation field” (link) Law Leader - Daeryun Law Firm, operates the only debt collection center among major law firms... “Combined with expertise in the litigation field” (link) Segye Ilbo - Daeryun Law Firm operates the law firm’s only debt collection center” (Shortcut)

Social awareness of drunk driving has changed significantly since the enactment of the ‘Yoon Chang-ho Act’ in 2018. As public anger was reflected at the time of enactment, the level of punishment for drunk driving was strengthened, and drunk driving became a serious crime. However, it is still not well known which legal provisions are actually applied and how. In particular, many people misunderstand that the ‘three strikes and out’ method is still maintained when it comes to punishment standards. The current Road Traffic Act has significantly increased the level of punishment for drivers who are caught drunk driving more than twice within 10 years. The basis for the strengthened punishment can be found in Article 148-2 of the Road Traffic Act. According to this provision, if a person violates the law again within 10 years from the date of being sentenced to a fine or higher for drunk driving, he or she may be subject to imprisonment for 2 to 6 years or a fine of 10 million to 30 million won based on a blood alcohol concentration of 0.2% or more. Actual cases clearly illustrate this point. Mr. A has been fined four times in the past for drunk driving, and has recently taken measures to prevent drunk driving, such as hiring a dedicated driver. But one day, a problem arose during a drinking party. After finishing the first drinking party, he was taken to the next location by a designated driver, but he was unable to contact the designated driver for nearly an hour to return home from the second drinking party, and Mr. A ended up getting behind the wheel again. The key to the case was how to prove that Mr. A did not intend to drink and drive from the beginning. Therefore, the lawyer in charge submitted objective data, such as the details of calling the substitute driver on the day of the incident and the vehicle location record, and also emphasized that the possibility of reoffending was low and social ties were strong through the diary of abstinence from drinking written after the incident, history of alcohol treatment counseling, and data on family support responsibility. As a result, the court pointed out in the ruling that “the defendant has a history of being fined four times for drunk driving in the past, so his guilt is not light,” but also stated, “he confessed to the crime and showed an attitude of remorse, and comprehensively took into account his age, occupation, family situation, and the circumstances at the time of the incident.” Even in a situation where the possibility of imprisonment was high, Mr. A was able to receive a suspended sentence through explanation of specific facts and a prepared strategy. Attorney Kim Min-soo of Daeryun Law Firm said, "For recidivist drunk driving offenders, the response at the initial investigation stage has a decisive influence. In particular, the level of punishment varies depending on whether the person can explain in detail the circumstances of the driving, post-action response, and sincerity of reflection. If you respond without the legal assistance of a professional lawyer, you may miss important facts or raise the risk of recidivism. “It is dangerous,” he advised. He added, “Especially in the case of repeat offenders, simply admitting the mistake is not enough. From the initial investigation stage, the circumstances of the driving must be clearly outlined, the individual’s social and family circumstances must be explained in detail, and materials that can prove the will to prevent repeat offenders must be systematically submitted.” Global Epic CP Lee Soo-hwan / lsh@globalepic.co.kr ‘Never twice’ Drunk driving: To prevent recidivism, you must seek help from a professional lawyer (Click here)

When I raised an audit, I was notified of dismissal from my position as bank manager… Request for payment of psychological compensation and alimony The court said, "Conflict occurred within the autonomous committee... Notice of dismissal was a measure taken to resolve the problem." Even if the cancellation of the bank account was determined to be invalid through an administrative lawsuit, the court ruled that it cannot be held liable for damages if there were no illegal elements. On April 29, the 1st Civil Affairs Division of the Gangneung Branch of the Chuncheon District Court lost the plaintiff's appeal for damages filed by A, a man in his 70s, against a local government and its public official, Mr. B. The ruling was made. Mr. A, who was working as a bank manager, requested an audit of some of the participants in the Resident Autonomy Committee event from the Administrative Welfare Center in 2021. The reason was that something inappropriate was done at the event at the time. Then, Mr. B, who was the director of the center at the time, dismissed Mr. A from his position as bank manager on the grounds that he was hindering harmony among residents. Accordingly, Mr. A filed a lawsuit against the city to invalidate the notice of cancellation of the bank account and won. Afterwards, Mr. A filed a lawsuit demanding 30 million won in alimony from Mr. B, claiming that he had suffered mental distress due to the dismissal notice. Mr. B and others refuted that there were no illegal elements in the dismissal process. As a result of the audit, Mr. A's claims were found to be untrue. Nevertheless, he argued that local public opinion worsened when Mr. A did not apologize, and that the dismissal was only decided to resolve the issue. The first trial dismissed Mr. A's claim. The court said, “The truth of the matter raised by the plaintiff was not clear, and this led to conflict and collective complaints both inside and outside the Resident Autonomy Committee,” and that there were no illegal elements in the dismissal, saying, “Therefore, as part of the resident autonomy work, there is a need for the center director to resolve complaints and take measures to resolve conflicts.” Mr. A, who was dissatisfied with this, appealed, but the second trial also dismissed the ruling. Daeryun Seo In-ho of the law firm who represented Mr. B and others The lawyer explained, “Even if the dismissal action is confirmed to be invalid through an administrative lawsuit, in order to file a civil suit for mental damage, an illegal act must be included in the dismissal process.” He added, “It is only recognized as inflicting mental pain if it is clear that it cannot be tolerated under social norms, such as intentionally creating a reason for dismissal.” He added, “It is true that a conflict arose, such as a boycott of the event, due to Mr. A, and Mr. B is only trying to resolve this,” adding, “Mr. “We were able to receive a dismissal order because there was no intention to intentionally drive him out of the bank manager position,” he added. Reporter Kim Jong-cheol (jckim99@sportsseoul.com)[View full article] Why did the court ‘dismiss’ the claim for compensation for mental damage from ‘illegal dismissal’? (Shortcut)

An office worker who was dismissed and then reinstated filed a lawsuit against the company for unpaid wages, but lost. On the 13th of last month, the Seoul Central District Court ruled that the plaintiff, Mr. A, lost in the wage lawsuit filed against financial company B. Mr. A was dismissed from company B in 2018 on the grounds of receiving money and other valuables. Mr. A, who refused to comply, filed a suit for unfair disciplinary action and won, and Company B reinstated Mr. A to his original position. Approximately 200 million won in unpaid wages was paid. Afterwards, Mr. A filed an additional lawsuit for the unpaid amount, claiming that the wage increase during the period of dismissal was not reflected in the amount paid. In addition, he claimed, “The company signed an agreement with the labor union to pay 50% more wages due to unfair disciplinary action,” and added, “In total, an additional payment of about 400 million won must be paid.” Company B countered that it had no obligation to pay, saying, “The judgment on wage payment has been completed through previous lawsuits.” In addition, the ‘agreement to add 50% to wages due to unfair disciplinary action’ was concluded after Mr. A’s disciplinary action occurred. Accordingly, the court ruled in favor of Company B. “The plaintiff received wages in a previous lawsuit, and this is the same lawsuit as the current case,” he said. “This is a matter that violates the res judicata of the previous lawsuit, so it is illegal because there is no interest in protecting rights.” He added, “The agreement with the labor union was concluded in 2021, but the plaintiff was fighting disciplinary dismissal with the defendant even before that.” He added, “The disciplinary action was taken in 2018 before the agreement was signed. “A plaintiff who has received a disposition cannot claim additional compensation,” he said. Attorney Bang In-tae of Daeryun Law Firm, who represented Company B, said, “During the trial, Mr. A claimed that he refiled the lawsuit because he was not aware of the additional wages.” He also explained, “By comparing the case with the previous lawsuit, we were able to prove that the nature of the case was the same, and we were able to obtain a dismissal decision.” Reporter Hye-jeong Cho (hjcho@kyeonggi.com)[View full article] After winning the unfair disciplinary action, the lawsuit for unpaid wages was 'lost'... What is the cause? (Shortcut)

Plaintiff: “It is difficult to view it as an act of deception.” A person in his 50s who was handed over to the prosecution on charges of stealing 100 million won by deceiving him by saying that he would help him make a larger market profit by obtaining a building permit by purchasing land was not indicted. On the 13th of last month, the Tongyeong Branch of the Changwon District Prosecutors' Office cleared two people, including Mr. A, in his 50s, who was accused of fraud on the 13th of last month. In April, they are accused of stealing 100 million won from victim B and others by deceiving a piece of land in Geoje, Gyeongsangnam-do, which could not receive a construction permit for lodging facilities, as if it could be licensed. Mr. B and others stated that Mr. A and his group lured them into investing by saying that they could make double the market profit by reselling the land after receiving a building permit. They also emphasized that they embezzled an additional 20 million won, saying they needed lobbying funds in relation to the building permit. Mr. A's side fully accused them of denied. The purpose is that there is no fact that investment was induced using market profits as bait. He also countered that aspects related to building permits must be confirmed with civil engineering or architectural design personnel, and that he was doing work completely unrelated to this. The prosecution also determined that Mr. A was not guilty. The land in this case was not land that was impossible to obtain permission for accommodations in the first place, and accordingly, it cannot be said that there was an act of deception by Mr. A and others. Attorney Kim Jin-won of Daeryun Law Firm, who represented Mr. A, said, “The issue in this case was whether or not a building permit was granted, but the reasons for the impossibility were determined based on the subjective review of the public officials in charge, such as concerns about damage to the surrounding natural scenery and aesthetics, so it was difficult for the general public to judge whether or not a building permit was granted.” He added, “Therefore, it cannot be said that Mr. B and others were deceived. “It is,” he said. Digital Content Team[View full article] “If you get a building permit and resell it, it doubles” Prosecutors ‘not indicted’ man in his 50s on land investment fraud charges (link)

Daeryun Law Firm announced on the 2nd that it signed a business agreement with the Seongnam City Academy Association on the 27th of last month to eradicate illegal private education. The Seongnam City Academies Association is an organization with a total of 2,000 members, including academy directors in the Seongnam region, and protects the rights and interests of member academies and represents their opinions. Through this agreement, Daeryun plans to provide professional legal services to crack down on illegal and illegal private tutoring regulations, including ▲advising on academy-related laws and system improvement, △reviewing legal issues such as academy operation, and ▲responding in case of disputes. Park Yoo-seo, president of the Seongnam City Academy Association, said, “In order to establish a healthy private education culture, we will declare war on illegal and illegal private tutoring rooms and conduct an intensive prevention campaign against illegal private tutoring classes, etc.” He added, “In addition, we hope for professional legal support from Daeryun so that illegal private tutoring classes can be eradicated.” Representative attorney Daeryun Park Seong-dong said, “The two companies plan to expand their cooperative relationship through continuous exchanges,” and added, “We will provide maximum support at the law firm level to reduce illegal private education cartels and irrationality so that a healthy private education culture can be established.”[View full article] Daeryun Law Firm and Seongnam City Academy Association join hands to eradicate illegal private education (Go here)

A man who stole billions of won from investors by promising guaranteed profits was sentenced to prison. According to the legal community on the 2nd, the 12th Criminal Division of the Seoul Eastern District Court recently sentenced Mr. A, the CEO of the company, who was indicted on charges of fraud, to 3 years and 6 months in prison. Mr. A was indicted on charges of embezzling about 2.8 billion won from 16 investors, including Mr. B, by promising guaranteed principal and interest payments over the past five years since 2018. In the process, some It was found that he had demanded additional money from the victims, saying, "There was a problem with the investment product." As a result of the investigation, it was revealed that Mr. A used the money he received from investors to invest in individual stocks and futures, then secured new investors and paid interest to existing members. Mr. A admitted most of the charges, but denied fraud against Mr. B, one of the victims. The investment contract with Mr. B was conducted by an employee of the company he ran. It was an argument that he had never met Mr. B in person. The court did not accept Mr. A's claim. The court said, "Mr. B entered into a contract based on the investment contract written by the defendant. Even if the defendant did not directly recommend investment, it seems likely that a report would have been made at the time the contract was concluded, considering the status of the defendant and the employee," adding, "The money deposited by Mr. He stated the reason for the sentencing, saying, "The victims have suffered for a considerable period of time by stealing money from many victims without the intention or ability to return the money." Attorney Park Seong-dong of Daeryun Law Firm, who represented Mr. B, said, "The crime of fraud must be judged generally and objectively, taking into account the specific circumstances at the time of the crime, such as the circumstances of the transaction. At the time of the incident, Mr. A was managing all accounts in the name of the company and fully managing the investment funds. “It appears that they have decided that it is acceptable,” he explained. Jeong Eui-jin (jej88@ikbc.co.kr)[View full article] Stealing 2.8 billion won by deceiving “guaranteed profits” and receiving 3 years and 6 months in prison (link)

Collaboration such as legal consultation and legal education support to recover from infringement on teaching rights. Representative Kim Kuk-il: “We will provide necessary legal support both on and off campus.” Daeryun Law Firm signed an MOU with the Korean Federation of Teachers’ Associations (KFTA) to take the lead in protecting teachers’ rights and interests and improving the education system. At the agreement ceremony held at the Korean Federation of Teachers’ Associations on the 29th of last month, Daeryun CEO Kim Kuk-il, Vice President Choi Yi-sun, lawyer Heo Ji-seon and Korean Federation of Teachers’ Federation President Kang Joo-ho, Key working-level staff, including Policy Director Cho Seong-cheol, Director Kim Dong-seok, and Secretary General Moon Kwon-guk, attended. The Korean Federation of Teachers' Associations was founded in 1947 as the ‘Joseon Education Association’ and is an organization whose members include teachers and educational administrators at all levels of education, including teachers at kindergartens, elementary, middle, high schools, and universities. △ It boasts the largest scale among domestic teacher organizations by working for the purposes of △ increasing the professionalism of teachers △ improving social and economic status △ protecting teaching rights. Based on their respective strengths, the two companies plan to cooperate in tasks such as △ legal consultation to recover from infringement on teaching rights △ legal advice such as legislation and requests for legal interpretation △ legal education support for students and teachers △ promotion and entrustment of joint research on teaching rights. Kang Joo-ho, Federation of Teachers of Korea The Chairman said, “I am pleased that through this agreement, we have prepared practical measures to create an environment in which teachers can focus on their primary role in education.” He added, “We will resolve issues that may arise in various disputes through organic cooperation with Daeryun, a global mega law firm.” Kim Kuk-il, CEO of Daeryun, said, “Under the recognition that an educational environment in which teachers are respected will guarantee the quality of education, we will faithfully fulfill our role as a partner in realizing public value in the education world with this agreement as an opportunity.” “The Daeryun School Violence Group has many lawyers with diverse experiences, including juvenile crime department prosecutors, education office disciplinary committee members, and lawyers with full teacher qualifications, so we can minimize risks by preemptively providing necessary legal advice both on and off campus,” he said. Meanwhile, both organizations plan to continue to expand their close cooperation system to fulfill their joint responsibilities in expanding teaching rights, improving systems, protecting teachers’ rights and interests, and responding to education policies, based on convergent cooperation in the fields of education and law.[View full article] Sejeong Ilbo - Daeryun Law Firm and the Federation of Korean Teachers and Education Associations sign an ‘MOU’ to prevent infringement on teaching rights (link) Tax and Finance News - Daeryun Law Firm and the Korean Federation of Teachers’ Associations... Academic Rights Protection Business Agreement (Shortcut)