Press Coverage

The criminal case process is largely divided into the investigation stage and the trial stage based on the prosecutor's indictment. The investigation stage is further divided into before and after the case is transferred to the police, and progresses into the police stage and the prosecution stage. In practice, you often come across clients who seek a lawyer only after they have already been investigated by the police. The person in question considers it as simply a one-time investigation, but from a lawyer's perspective, there are many cases where a major turning point in the case has already been passed. Since the trial begins with the prosecution's indictment, the general public often overlooks the importance of responding early to the investigation. But the reality is not like that. There are many cases where the outline and direction of the case are largely determined at the beginning of the investigation, especially at the police stage. Whether or not to admit the charges, what statement to make and how to make it, and the attitude and expression of each statement have a great impact on whether or not to be prosecuted and future defense strategies. In particular, if the statement is inconsistent or inconsistent, the credibility of the person's entire statement is bound to be shaken. In fact, even though it was a similar case, there are many cases where the person received legal assistance in the early stages to organize the facts, submitted a written opinion to the investigative agency, and continued to make consistent arguments, resulting in a disposition of ‘no charges’ or ‘suspended prosecution.’ Conversely, if the suspect has been investigated alone several times and then belatedly hires a lawyer, the unfavorable statements have already been recorded and the room for defense is greatly reduced. In some cases, out of embarrassment, a person recklessly denies the charges, but later changes his position and admits to the crime, thereby losing the important sentencing element of ‘cooperating with the investigation from the beginning.’ In this way, the initial response to the investigation is completely different from the perception that “all you have to do is undergo the investigation.” Once a statement is made, it cannot be easily taken back, and a single expression written in the record can have a significant impact on legal interpretation. Therefore, before engaging in an investigation by an investigative agency, it is advisable to clearly organize one's position and make a statement after receiving a sufficient explanation of the legal structure and issues of the case. Therefore, it is necessary to recognize that it is necessary to receive legal assistance before being investigated. The sooner you start your defense strategy, the better, and it is important to remember that the criminal process begins before the investigation, not after the indictment.[View full article] [Contribution] How to defend yourself in the early stages of an investigation (Shortcut)

Systematic case diagnosis and assignment of customized experts like a general hospital... Establishment of an ‘integrated law firm’ system “Strengthening expertise in all fields... We will spare no effort in providing thorough legal support from initial consultation to resolution” The paradigm of legal services is changing. In the past, it was common for an individual lawyer to take charge of the entire litigation process from consultation to trial, but now, as the complexity of cases increases, such as civil disputes turning into criminal cases or corporate disputes being linked to violations of the Fair Trade Act, the need to provide comprehensive legal solutions is emerging. In this trend, nine years ago, Daeryun Law Firm emerged with a differentiated positioning as a ‘general legal hospital’ and attracted the attention of the industry. Just as in a general hospital, multiple specialists collaborate to comprehensively diagnose and treat the patient's condition, Daeryun also has a system in which various experts come together to provide customized legal services in a one-stop manner. Based on this, Daeryun ranked 9th in the law firm industry's sales in 2024 within 9 years of its establishment and became one of the 'Top 10 Law Firms'. Kim Kuk-il, CEO of Daeryun Law Firm, said, "General hospitals provide medical services for accurate disease diagnosis. “Emergency medicine and pathology doctors identify the patient's symptoms through consultation and assign a specialist accordingly,” he said. “Because early diagnosis is important in legal matters, we are focusing on accurately understanding the essence of the problem, and analyzing the characteristics of each case and assigning the right expert.” In fact, within the law firm Daeryun, a lawyer who only provides legal consultation is in charge of the first consultation in order to accurately and quickly identify issues in the early stage. This is a method in which a lawyer with experience in cases in various fields accurately diagnoses the case and suggests the optimal solution. CEO Kook-il Kim said, “Through consulting attorneys, you can not only provide solutions but also proactively receive legal advice on related legal risks.” In addition, law firm Daeryun has established itself as an “integrated law firm” by reorganizing its own dividend system. After the consulting attorney's diagnosis of the case is completed, experts specialized in each field, including civil and criminal affairs, as well as corporate legal affairs, finance, intellectual property rights, and debt collection, are assigned to help resolve the case. The system has been reorganized so that customers, including corporations, can receive all necessary assistance within the law firm without having to move to multiple law firms. The advantage is that a comprehensive response is possible in a wide range of fields based on the expertise secured by recruiting experts in various fields such as taxation, accounting, and international trade. Furthermore, by establishing a close collaboration system between the main office in Yeouido and 42 branch offices nationwide, the direct distribution system through the main office control tower has been advanced so that experts specialized in the case are assigned even if consultation is received from anywhere. This is a system that was established from the beginning of the law firm Daeryun's establishment in order to overcome the limitations of the existing legal market, where there is a gap in the quality of legal services between Seoul and other regions. “The purpose of customers coming to the law firm is to win their cases through legal support,” said Ko Byeong-jun, CEO of the law firm Daeryun. “It is a system for customers who were previously limited in the choice of lawyers within a small region to optimally match an experienced and professional lawyer to their case beyond regional limitations.” “At Daeryun, among hundreds of lawyers, a single team that includes the lawyer who is best suited to the client’s case takes charge of the case, establishes a progress strategy, and proceeds.” said Go Byeong-jun, the general manager and managing attorney, “Daeryun considers the rights and interests of clients as its top priority, and with the motto of being a ‘general legal hospital,’ we have made Daeryun what it is today by continuously strengthening our expertise so that we can resolve cases in any field in one place at Daeryun.” “We will become a legal partner that clients can trust and rely on by providing thorough legal support until resolution,” he said.[View full article] ‘Accurately from the initial diagnosis’...Daeryun differentiates legal services with the motto of ‘General Legal Hospital’ (Go here)

The Labor Relations Commission ruled that if a worker commits an illegal act by mistake, it cannot be considered a serious misconduct. According to the legal community on the 2nd, the Jeonnam Regional Labor Relations Commission ruled in February in a lawsuit filed by a man in his 40s, A, a man in his 40s, against transportation company B for relief from unfair dismissal. It also ordered the company to reinstate Mr. A and pay him the wages he did not receive during the period of dismissal. Last year, Mr. A received about 100,000 in-house support funds for people assigned to non-affiliated areas. He was notified of dismissal for receiving 20 million won illegally. The company claimed that Mr. A, who had been separated from his family after his appointment, had received support money without informing the company even though he had moved back in with his children. However, Mr. A refuted that he only had his children stay at his home while sharing child care with his spouse and that he had no intention of embezzlement. He also returned all the illegally received money, and compared to the suspension in similar cases in the past, this was excessive. He emphasized that the disposition was taken. The committee ruled in favor of Mr. A. “There is no objective data to show that the worker did not live with his family, so the act of illegal receipt is recognized.” It said, “There is no clearly defined standard for ‘living with family’, which is the reason for loss of subsidy eligibility, so it cannot be said that workers are clearly aware of the standard.” It went on to say, “It is difficult to say that it was carried out with malice because workers may have misunderstood the criteria for the reason for loss and judged it differently.” “The full amount has been recovered, and it is inconsistent with the disposition made in similar cases,” he said, explaining that it constitutes an unfair dismissal. Lee Ki-eun, a lawyer at Daeryun Law Firm on Mr. A’s side, said, “In order for a worker to be dismissed, there must be an act of misconduct on the part of the employee that makes it impossible for the employee to continue the employment relationship according to social norms. In Mr. A’s case, it is difficult to say that an unlawful act of misconduct exists because he had his children stay at home for a certain period of time and took care of them.” Reporter Jeong Eui-jin (jej88@ikbc.co.kr)[View full article] Dismissal of workers who illegally received in-house subsidies...Labor Committee's 'unfair dismissal' (link)

Employee suspected of accessing portal mailbox without permission: “I only checked the list for recruitment purposes” Court: “Information shared… no intention” A person in his 20s who was indicted on charges of logging into another person’s account without permission and checking e-mail was found not guilty. On February 20, the Ulsan District Court found Mr. A, a teacher at a children’s center who had been put on trial on charges of violating the Information and Communications Network Act, not guilty. In 2021, Mr. A accessed the portal site account of Mr. B, the representative of the children’s center where he worked, without permission. He was accused of logging in and viewing the email list. At the time, Mr. A was found to have committed this crime in response to a colleague's request to check the list of applicants during the process of recruiting new employees. Mr. A denied the charge. The reason was that the CEO shared the account with employees for work reasons, and the account was set to auto-login, so anyone could access it. At the same time, he emphasized that he only checked recruitment-related emails and did not read personal emails. The court ruled that Mr. A was not guilty. The court ruled, “The victim shared her ID and password with employees, including the defendant,” and “There was no intention that the defendant did not have legitimate authority to access the email or broke into the account by exceeding the permitted authority.” He continued, “He only accessed the email and checked the list, but did not click on a specific email, so it cannot be said that he found out the contents.” He added, “Whether or not the resume was received cannot be considered a matter to be kept confidential.” Daeryun Law Firm, which represented Mr. A. Attorney Jeon Hyeon-joo explained, “The crime of detecting contents of electronic records, etc., is established when the contents of electronic records that have become secret devices are discovered using technical means,” adding, “In this case, the court accepted that a crime cannot be established because the email was accessed while automatically logged in without any method such as hacking.” Digital Content Team[View full article] ‘Log in to main account and view email’ employee… Law: Not guilty as it is not an infringement of secrets (Shortcut)

Daeryun Law Firm "Needs preemptive response" to the rehabilitation application for 'Balan', which led civil and criminal lawsuits during the Timeef incident. Daeryun Law Firm announced on the 2nd that it has formed a legal support task force (TF) to support victims in response to the rehabilitation application for the online luxury goods trading platform 'Balan'. Through this TF, Daeryun plans to develop a multifaceted legal response, including relief for damage to consumers and sellers, analysis of the platform's fund management structure, review of criminal liability, and class action lawsuits. The TF will involve more than 10 professionals including lawyers, accountants, tax accountants, and IT legal experts from the Daeryun Corporate Legal Group. Regarding the launch of this TF, attorney Daeryun Son Gye-jun, who is in charge of the head of the corporate legal group, said, “The Balan incident is an example that shows the structural risks that can occur in a typical consumer trust-based platform,” and emphasized, “It is necessary to carefully examine complex legal issues such as the platform’s fund management method and the illegality of its terms and conditions beyond the simple refund issue.” The TF is headed by Attorney Son, who is an expert in the field of corporate law and taxation and has also played an active role in the ‘Tmon and WeMakePrice (TimePrice) incidents.’ Attorney Shin Jong-su joined. In addition, △Attorney Bang In-tae, a labor lawyer and corporate litigation expert registered with the Korean Bar Association, △Attorney Won-sang Kim, a corporate rehabilitation and bankruptcy expert with experience participating in the Korea Pizza Hut lawsuit, △Attorney Min-hee Ji, a former in-house lawyer with extensive experience in fair trade and patents, △Attorney Jeong Sang-hyeok, a human resources and labor expert who has served as a member of deliberation and investigation committees for numerous companies, △An investigation by the Fair Trade Commission, etc. Attorney Hee-gon Cho, who has extensive experience in corporate litigation and consulting, △ Attorney Seo-young Kim, who has handled numerous rehabilitation and bankruptcy cases as an insolvency lawyer registered with the Korean Bar Association, and △ Attorney Young-jae Nam, a former head of legal affairs at a POSCO Group affiliate, will join the task force. In addition, △ Labor attorney Seo-hye Nam, who has provided labor law advice to numerous companies including IT, service, and distribution, △ Many large corporations and public institutions. Accountant Park Won-chan, who has experience conducting accounting audits, will take a comprehensive response by reviewing areas such as accounting and labor. Daeryun has led civil and criminal lawsuits on behalf of sellers who suffered damage from non-payment of settlement payments during the ‘Timeef Incident’ last year. At the time, Daeryun received attention for his proactive response, including suing Q10 Group executives on charges of fraud and breach of trust. Daeryun believes that this Balan incident also has similar structural problems and believes that a preemptive response is needed. Through this TF, Daeryun plans to review not only the problem of delayed refunds by consumers, but also the problem of unsettled payments by sellers, credit card cancellation refusals, and violations of terms and conditions, as well as all other issues. In addition, we plan to carry out group response procedures in parallel depending on whether the damage spreads. Attorney Son said, “Following the Timeef incident, the Balan incident occurred, and the unclear settlement system and fund management method of e-commerce platforms is emerging as a major problem.” He added, “Through this TF, we will not only provide practical legal assistance to the victims, but will also strive to prepare institutional improvement measures for the overall platform industry based on advice from Daeryun experts.” Meanwhile, Balan attracted investment funds on the 31st of last month. Due to setbacks and a liquidity crunch, the company applied for corporate rehabilitation procedures at the Seoul Rehabilitation Court. As a result, problems with settlement delays occurred, raising concerns that the Timef incident might be repeated. Balan said, “No financial damage has occurred to general consumers, and the amount of unpaid commercial receivables is less than Balan’s monthly transaction amount,” and announced that it would attract a buyer before rehabilitation approval and repay the full amount of unpaid receivables. Choi Oh-hyun (ohyo@edaily.co.kr)[View full article] Edaily - "Concerns about a repeat of the Timef incident"... Daeryun Law Firm ‘Balan’ Recovery Task Force Launched (Click here) Korea Economic Daily TV - "We must prevent the second Timef incident"... Daeryun forms an Avengers team to provide legal support for the ‘Balan incident’ (link) Asian Economy - ‘Concern about a second Timeef’ Balan non-settlement situation, Daeryun legal support TF launched (Go here) Segye Ilbo - Luxury goods platform ‘Balan’ applies for corporate rehabilitation… Daeryun launches legal support task force (link) Jikseol - Daeryun launches legal support task force for ‘balan incident’ (link)

A lawyer accused of insulting and defaming his superior by calling him "a brainless... mentally deranged" lawyer in the dormitory said, "I exaggerated the matter while complaining on the phone... it was not intentional." There was a case in which a soldier who was handed over to the military prosecutors on charges of gossiping about a superior in the presence of fellow soldiers was not indicted. On March 7, the Army Prosecutor's Office responded to Soldier A, who was accused of defaming and defaming his superiors. It was confirmed that the indictment was dismissed due to insufficient evidence. In November 2024, while five fellow soldiers were listening, Soldier A said to his superiors in the same unit, "It seems like they are taking out their brains even when they give them vacation. (The victims) are all mentally insane." He also said to the administrative supply officer, "I am sick, but they do not show me the hospital. Since I did not receive treatment, I will report it under the medical law," and was accused of openly revealing false information. During the investigation, Soldier A argued that the charges were not established, emphasizing, “It was an extremely personal phone call with my mother, and the act did not have a performance nature, so it does not amount to an insult to a superior.” The military prosecutor who investigated this case said, “The witnesses gave very specific statements about the situation at the time of the suspect’s speech, so it is acknowledged that the suspect spoke as if he was the suspect,” and added, “The suspect used somewhat extreme expressions in the phone call with his mother, but that did not affect the social value of the victims.” “It is difficult to say that it constitutes an insulting remark that would lower the evaluation,” and a non-indictment was decided against Soldier A. Attorney Jeon Hyo-cheol of the Daeryun Law Firm, who represented the suspect Soldier A in this case, said, “According to the Supreme Court ruling, whether it constitutes an insult as an insult must be strictly judged in light of objective circumstances such as the relationship between the parties, the circumstances leading to the expression, the method of expression, and the situation at the time, and whether it is an expression that can infringe on the other party’s external reputation.” “It is not based on emotions,” he explained. Attorney Jeon Hyo-cheol continued, “Soldier A only used some exaggerated expressions while complaining to his mother that he did not receive as much leave as expected, and it was not a lie that he was injured while working and needed treatment. Therefore, it cannot be seen that there was an intention to damage the victim’s reputation, so it was concluded that there was no charge.” Reporter Son Dong-wook, Lawleader, twson@lawleader.co.kr A soldier was sent for gossiping about his superiors in front of fellow soldiers...Military prosecutors ‘not indicted’ (Shortcut)

Last year, the number of industrial accident compensation applications and approvals was the highest in nearly 10 years. According to the Korea Workers' Compensation and Welfare Service's status of industrial accident applications and approvals by year (2015-2024), the number of industrial accident applications last year was 173,603, a 6.5% increase from the previous year. The number of approvals also reached 151,753, the highest in 10 years. Industrial Accident Compensation Insurance is a system in which the Korea Workers' Compensation and Welfare Service pays insurance benefits when a worker suffers an accident while working. If there is a connection between work and the accident, payment is made and is mainly divided into medical expenses, temporary absence benefits, disability benefits, and survivors' benefits. This has the nature of 'no fault liability', so compensation is provided regardless of the liability, such as the company's negligence in management or the worker's negligence. In addition to industrial accident compensation, another way to receive compensation is through industrial accident compensation, a civil lawsuit. Unlike industrial accident compensation, industrial accident compensation is when the court orders the company to compensate for an accident caused by the employer's negligence or intent. Industrial accident compensation can be claimed differently depending on active, passive, and mental damage. First, active damages include medical expenses used prior to industrial accident treatment and medical expenses that will be used in the future. Passive damages include lost income and severance pay, and mental damages refer to compensation for the worker's mental suffering caused by the accident. The most important point here is the employer's negligence. Employers have an obligation under the employment contract to take necessary measures to ensure that workers can work safely. If an accident occurs due to the employer's negligence in improving safety devices or working conditions, the amount of compensation is determined in proportion to the negligence. Proof of this must be provided by the worker claiming compensation. However, even if the employer is at fault, it is rare for this to be readily acknowledged. In one of the cases I was actually responsible for, there was a case where a restaurant worker filed a lawsuit against the management company. At the time, the worker claimed that he fell due to moisture left on the floor and seriously injured his knee, but the company denied any connection to work, saying that the worker suffered the injury while going to the bathroom. Accordingly, the author emphasized that time to resolve basic physiological phenomena is included in work hours. In addition, the company was able to receive damages by expressing the fact that it had not taken any special measures to prevent slipping in the workplace. In order to successfully claim compensation for industrial accidents, it is necessary to prove that the employer was negligent by securing the circumstances of the accident and evidence. However, unlike compensation under industrial accident insurance, civil lawsuits have complicated procedures, and disaster standards may be applied differently for each case. Therefore, it is necessary to approach it carefully and with the help of experts. Small and Medium Business Team[View full article] The key to winning a case for industrial accident damages is ‘proving the employer’s negligence’ (link)

A teenager who assaulted a student of his age whom he met for the first time at an overseas experiential learning camp was spared a protective measure thanks to the court's leniency. Although he injured the other student during a physical fight with an upper-class student, it was recognized as self-defense. The Suwon Family Court announced in January that it had decided not to indict Mr. A (13), who was put on trial on charges of insult and injury. Person A is accused of using violence against Person B, who was assigned to the same dormitory at an overseas education camp in February of last year. The conflict between the two began during a social game that was part of the camp program. Group B claimed that other students, including Group A, were responsible for his continued defeat. Boy A refuted, saying, “I have never taken any shortcuts,” and eventually a physical fight broke out. As a result, Group A suffered a broken nose, and Group B suffered an injury to his jaw that required two weeks of treatment. At the trial, Group A explained, "Group B swore at Group A and made threatening gestures as if he was trying to hit him several times. He used violence in defense to escape aggressive behavior." At the same time, he emphasized, "Group B's one-sided verbal abuse and assault were the cause of this incident, and he was forced to return to Korea immediately after the incident." The court also ruled that A's actions were unintentional and decided to disqualify him. Lawyer Jang Eun-min of Daeryun Law Firm, who represented A, said, "B had filed a criminal complaint at the same time as reporting the school violence, and in this case, the perpetrator and the victim were reversed." He said, "The School Violence Response Committee (School Violence Committee) only acknowledged the assault by the two people and decided to take action against A, but we filed an administrative lawsuit and received a decision to cancel." He added, "As a result of the unilateral assault by B, an upperclassman, A was diagnosed with a fractured nose bone. The School Violence Committee also recognized A's actions as self-defense, and based on this, we were able to prove that the victim in this case was A, not B." Hwang Jeong-won added. Reporter (jwhwang@mt.co.kr)[View full article] It was self-defense, but the perpetrator and victim were reversed... School violence among middle school students, court decision (link)

The court ordered the local government to demolish public sewage treatment-related facilities installed without permission on private land and hand over the land. The Jeonju District Court recently ruled in favor of the plaintiff in a facility demolition and land handover lawsuit filed against Jeonju City by Mr. A, a resident of a townhouse. Mr. A filed a civil complaint with Jeonju City in 2022 requesting that the public sewage pipe installed within the residential land and the fence protecting it be moved and installed. This facility is a sewer pipe that is not used by the residents of the townhouse where Mr. A lives, because it interfered with vehicle traffic and building repair work. However, the city responded that relocation was difficult because there were no national or public lands nearby. Mr. A then asked the city to suggest alternatives, such as opening a vehicle entrance and exit road. However, as the city took no action, Mr. A filed a lawsuit. During the trial, the city claimed that the facilities were installed for safety reasons when the townhouse was built. At the same time, he emphasized that if the city had installed this facility, there would have been consent from the owners of the townhouses. However, the court ruled in favor of Mr. A, saying, "The sewer pipe in question is being used to treat sewage from buildings near the townhouse where Mr. A lives, and the townhouse is treating sewage by installing a separate septic tank. There is no data showing that the consent of the townhouse owners was obtained or compensation was paid when installing the sewer pipes and fences." The court also ruled in favor of Mr. A. “According to the Sewerage Act, the city is responsible for managing sewer pipes. It is reasonable to view that the city, which is responsible for managing sewer pipes, installed the facility without permission and occupied the land without the consent of the townhouse owners who own the land, so it has an obligation to demolish the facility and hand over the land,” the ruling said. Mr. A’s legal representative, Jeong Woo-hyung, an attorney at Daeryun Law Firm, said, “The Sewerage Act provides for the local government to take responsibility for cases where a local government uses someone else’s land when installing a public sewer pipe. “It stipulates compensation, and if Mr. A agreed to the installation as claimed by the local government, appropriate compensation should have been provided, but such evidence did not exist.” Reporter Jeong Cheol-wook[View full article] Local government failed to provide an alternative to the request for relocation of public facilities to private land... Court, demolition order (link)

While we were dating, we asked to break up several times, but he threatened to expose the fact that we maintained our relationship through assault... The victim complained of extreme stress. A man in his 50s was sentenced to prison for threatening and even assaulting his mistress for several years after she notified him of a breakup. On the 11th of last month, the Jeju District Court sentenced Mr. A (53), who was indicted on charges of injury, etc., to one year in prison. Mr. A was indicted on charges of hitting his face several times in anger at the request for a breakup from his mistress B around September 2020. At the time, it was revealed that Mr. A committed this act while fighting over his affair. Afterwards, Mr. A went to the store run by Mr. B and made a fuss by breaking the door lock and yelling. In addition, it was confirmed that Mr. A broke into Mr. B's vehicle without permission, damaged the black box, stole the memory chip, and used a location tracking app to monitor his private life. At the trial, Mr. A denied most of the crimes, saying, "It is unfair because there are many things that are different from the facts." The court sentenced Mr. A to prison based on the facts of the damage. The court ruled, “The defendant is complaining of injustice from the investigative agency to the court, but looking at the submitted evidence, he is judged guilty.” “There is no reflection or common sense explanation from the defendant, and the motive for the crime and the surrounding circumstances are very bad.” Attorney Park Yong-du of Daeryun Law Firm, who is Mr. B’s legal representative, said, “Mr. B has already tried to escape from Mr. A several times, but he was bound to fail every time.” “The relationship continued through gaslighting (psychological control),” he said. “Mr. B, who suffered physical, mental, and property damage from Mr. A, is complaining of pain to the extent that it is difficult to live his daily life. As a result of proving the damage on behalf of Mr. B, the perpetrator was able to be severely punished.” Reporter Kim Jong-cheol (jckim99@sportsseoul.com)[View full article] Man in his 50s sentenced to prison for assaulting and threatening a mistress who asked for a breakup (link)