Press Coverage

The suspect said, “I discarded everything I downloaded as a work order.” The prosecution countered, “It is difficult to admit that the suspect was accused based on the fact that he downloaded and changed jobs, and there is insufficient evidence.”There have been cases where employees who were accused of downloading a large amount of confidential data from their previous workplace and passing it on to a competitor were not indicted. The Daejeon District Prosecutors' Office was confirmed to have decided not to indict two people, including employee A, who were accused of violating the Unfair Competition Prevention and Trade Secret Protection Act (leakage of trade secrets overseas, etc.) and breach of trust due to insufficient evidence on January 23. They were not charged until 2022. They were accused of downloading over 20,000 trade secret files from the company they were working for, and later transferred to an overseas competitor and used the files, and were forwarded to the prosecution. The accuser's company claimed that after they announced their intention to resign, they received the data on their personal USB drive without justifiable reason and stole it outside. However, suspect A and others completely denied the charges. He countered by saying, “I only downloaded the file to follow work instructions for reviewing the data,” and claimed, “During this process, all USBs used were discarded for security reasons, so no data was leaked.” In addition, “I left the company six months after the download,” and emphasized, “At the time of receiving the data, there was absolutely no purpose for it to be used by a competitor.” The prosecutors who investigated this case decided that the charges were not admissible. Regarding the reason for non-indictment, the prosecution said, “It is acknowledged that Mr. A and others downloaded technical data files to a personal storage device and worked in the same position at a competitor company after leaving the company, but it is difficult to admit the charges based on these facts alone.” Also, “The files were not found on the laptops and mobile phones of the confiscated suspects.” Attorney Hwang Se-jeong of Daeryun Law Firm, who defended suspects A and others in this case, said, “For the charge of leaking trade secrets to be recognized, the data must be used or used abroad. “They had to leak it knowing that it was there,” he said, adding, “The employees downloaded it to perform their duties, and there was no evidence of the company they moved to using the data, so the charges do not stand.” Reporter Son Dong-wook (twson@lawleader.co.kr)[View full article] Employees who downloaded large amounts of company confidential information and transferred to competitors... Prosecutors ‘not indicted’ (link)

Recently, Korea's defense industry has stood out on the international stage based on its technological prowess and competitiveness. In 2024, Korea's defense exports amounted to approximately $9.5 billion, solidifying its position as the world's top 10 defense exporter. These achievements are the result of innovation and effort in the fields of the army, navy, and air force, and at the same time, they further highlight the need for legal support for entering the international market. Korea's K9 self-propelled howitzers account for more than 50% of the global self-propelled artillery market share and have been exported to 10 countries to date. In particular, it was adopted by major countries such as Poland, Finland, and Australia, proving its reliability on the battlefield. Through local production of engines, it has become possible to enter various markets such as the Middle East without approval from the German government, and such large-scale defense exports show that legal review, including contract performance guarantees, export control regulations, and technology transfer restrictions, is essential. However, in some countries, there have been cases where legal disputes have arisen during the arms delivery process after signing a contract, or the schedule has been disrupted due to delays in export permits. These problems can be prevented through thorough legal review and prior action in consideration of international norms. As the United States' strategy to keep China in check is in full swing, the expansion of its naval power is underway, and accordingly, Korean shipbuilders are participating in ship construction and maintenance projects through cooperation with allies. Korea possesses world-class warship and submarine construction technology, and the Republic of Korea Navy's Next-Generation Destroyer (KDDX) and Jang Bogo-III class submarine projects are receiving great interest in overseas markets. However, in the past, there was a case where a legal dispute arose over the scope of technology transfer and maintenance responsibility after a Korean shipbuilder signed a contract to build an overseas naval ship. This suggests that long-term legal response and careful review of the contract structure are essential due to the nature of defense contracts. In the air force field, the Korean fighter KF-21 was developed independently, proving the technological prowess of the aviation industry. The KF-21 is a state-of-the-art aircraft with some stealth features, and its main export targets are Southeast Asian and European countries. Although the export market is expected to expand in the future, international regulations regarding aircraft and related technology transfer are very strict. For example, some countries restrict certain key technologies, and even after an export agreement is signed, there is a risk that the deal will be disrupted by regulatory changes. Therefore, it is essential for defense companies to continuously monitor international export regulations and respond legally. As the defense industry expands into the international market, the importance of legal support is growing. The export of defense products overseas is not a simple transaction of technology, but is directly related to each country's military and diplomatic strategies, so international laws and trade regulations must be strictly observed. In addition, defense companies must prevent legal disputes that may arise in the process of establishing overseas partnerships and minimize legal risks that arise during contract conclusion and implementation. In conclusion, the global expansion of the Korean defense industry is the result of technological prowess and quality, but legal support is essential to make it sustainable. In order for defense companies to maintain continuous growth and competitiveness in the international market, professional legal assistance must be provided, and a systematic legal support environment needs to be created in preparation for future expansion of defense exports and increased international cooperation. Small and Medium Business Team[View full article] [Contribution] Growth of the Korean defense industry and the need for legal support (link)

Additional life sentence for stabbing a fellow inmate with sharp chopsticks... A life sentence inmate who was indicted for stabbing a fellow inmate with a weapon and sentenced to three years in prison in the first trial received a reduced sentence on appeal. According to the legal community on the 25th, the Busan District Court Criminal Appeal Division 3-2 (Chief Judge So-yeon Lee) overturned the original trial that sentenced A (in his 60s), who was indicted on special injury, to two years in prison at the sentencing hearing. According to the crime acknowledged by the court. Mr. A was sentenced to life imprisonment for murder by the Busan High Court in August 1989 and was serving a sentence in Busan Prison. At around 1 a.m. on May 13 last year, Mr. A made a sharp weapon by grinding the end of a plastic chopstick on the cement floor of a bathroom to stab fellow inmate B (60s), with whom he had a difficult relationship, at Busan Prison in Gangseo-gu, Busan. Subsequently, Mr. A is accused of stabbing Mr. B in the face several times with a weapon prepared in advance at a workshop in the prison at around 10:10 a.m. on the same day. As a result, Mr. B reportedly suffered injuries to his face that required two weeks of treatment. In October last year, the first trial court sentenced Mr. A to three years in prison. Afterwards, Mr. A filed an appeal on the grounds that the sentence in the first trial was too much. The appellate court said, "Mr. A has already been punished several times for violent crimes, and although he was sentenced to life imprisonment for murder and is serving a life sentence, he committed this crime again. However, considering all the sentencing factors, such as the fact that Mr. A admits to the crime in this case and the fact that the victim fortunately did not suffer fatal injuries, the original trial's sentence is unreasonable because it is too heavy." The sentence was commuted. What does an additional prison sentence mean to a defendant who was sentenced to life imprisonment like Mr. A? Attorney Kim Young-hyung of the Daeryun Law Firm explained, “If a life sentence inmate is sentenced to additional imprisonment, there is a very high possibility that he or she will be deprived of the opportunity for parole review,” adding, “Also, from a criminal policy perspective, it has the effect of facilitating the management of inmates through the disadvantage that if they harm someone or commit a crime in prison, they may receive an additional sentence and extend their sentence.” According to the criminal law, life imprisonment is Even sentenced inmates are eligible for parole if they serve more than 20 years. In fact, life-sentence prisoners who have committed accidental offenses or have extenuating circumstances and whose lives in prison are exemplary are often paroled. Reporter Kwon Tae-wan (kwon97@newsis.com)[View full article] Prisoner in his 60s who stabbed a fellow inmate with a weapon has his sentence commuted on appeal (link)

A company that invested 100 million won in a consulting company but did not receive the principal and profits filed a lawsuit for the investment and won. The court ruled that it was illegal to induce investment by guaranteeing high returns. According to the legal community on the 24th, the Seoul Central District Court ruled in favor of the plaintiff on January 17 in a lawsuit filed by electric construction company A against management consulting company B, requesting return of investment money. Previously, Company A was a consulting company in March 2023. I received financial counseling from Company B. Through this, Company B, which had become acquainted with Company A, urged me to invest, saying that it would provide various management consulting services free of charge. Afterwards, in April of the same year, the two companies set an investment repayment date and rate of return for the investment amount of 180 million won and signed an investment contract. However, it is known that Company B changed its attitude after the investment was paid. Initially, Company B paid profits for 6 months, but after that, not only the profits but also the principal for more than a year. It was confirmed that Company A had not returned the investment. It was revealed that Company B had delayed the return, citing various reasons despite several requests by Company A to return the investment. Accordingly, Company A filed a lawsuit requesting return of the investment. Company A argued that the entire principal should be returned, citing the fact that Company B did not fulfill the terms of the investment contract and illegally collected a large amount of investment money using high interest as bait. The court said, "Company B did not have the ability to keep the original agreement and made the investment. The ruling ruled that Company A should pay the full principal amount of the investment, considering that Company A suffered damages due to Company B's illegal actions. Yang Ki-yeon, a lawyer at Daeryun Law Firm who represented Company A, said, "An important issue in litigation for the return of investment is determining whether there were illegal parts in the investment process." “Phrases such as ‘investment contract’, ‘investment’, ‘investment operating period’, and ‘monthly dividend guaranteed rate of return’ were clearly stated,” he explained. Reporter Ko Young-min (youngman@ikbc.co.kr)[View full article] 'Consulting fraud targeting companies'... Court says full investment amount must be repaid (link)

Chest injury due to soil collapsing during work... Construction company: “There was some negligence on the part of the workers.” The court said, “The construction company had a duty to inspect areas at risk of collapse in advance, but failed to do so.” A worker who was seriously injured after being buried in the dirt while working on a manhole filed a lawsuit for damages against the company and won. On January 22, the Chuncheon District Court ruled that A, a man in his 60s, should pay about 60 million won to the plaintiff in a lawsuit against construction company B for damages. In 2022, while working to drill a hole in a manhole at a construction site with a colleague, I suffered an accident when soil collapsed. As a result, Mr. A suffered serious injuries to his chest. Accordingly, Mr. A filed a lawsuit for damages, claiming that Company B did not fulfill its duty of care to prevent the accident. Company B countered that Mr. A was negligent. At the time of the accident, Mr. A was watching his colleague's drilling work and performing an assisting role, so he should have observed his duty of care by observing his surroundings in more detail. The court ruled in Mr. A's favor. The court said, “Employers must check for cracks or the risk of collapse when workers work in places where there is a risk of soil collapse,” and “Nevertheless, the defendant did not fulfill these obligations.” He added, “It is difficult to see the plaintiff’s negligence in causing the accident and expanding the damage,” and added, “It is the responsibility to compensate the plaintiff for the damages.” Lee Ji-yeon, an attorney at Daeryun Law Firm who represented Mr. A, said, “In order to be recognized for damages due to an industrial accident, the employer must “We must prove that the accident occurred due to intent or negligence and the causal relationship,” he explained. “In this case, we were able to prove Company B’s negligence by emphasizing that the accident occurred because the company failed to take safety measures, such as installing a safety net or placing a manager on the manhole.” Reporter Shin Jae-yu (wayjay@sportsseoul.com)[View full article] A worker suffered an industrial accident in a manhole... Law ruling: “Company compensates for medical expenses and alimony” (link)

[View full article] Submarine cable, LS Cable vs. Taihan Cable technology leak mystery (link)

Daeryun Law Firm, which provides legal advice on overall matters such as investment, personnel, and labor, announced that it has signed an MOU with Gyeongnam Passenger, a transportation company in the Seoul and Gyeonggi region, to expand the transportation business. At the signing ceremony held at Gyeongnam Passenger's headquarters on the 19th, key officials including Daeryun Kim Kuk-il, CEO of Management Nam Young-jae from the Corporate Legal Group, and Gyeongnam Passenger CEO Nam Kyung-hoon attended. Gyeongnam Passenger was established in 1959 and operates airport buses, town buses, and city buses. It is a company engaged in the passenger transportation business, operating routes across the country and contributing to the development of public transportation. In addition, since its founding, it has provided the best passenger transportation services to customers and has won awards in various fields, such as an industrial award, a presidential commendation, and a commendation from the Minister of Land, Infrastructure and Transport. Daeryun and Gyeongnam Passenger have decided to cooperate in various fields such as passenger operation and human resource training. According to this agreement, the two companies will cooperate in areas such as △ Preventing legal risks due to diversification of business areas △ Legal consultation for transportation workers △ Legal education for executives and employees △ Corporate labor and tax advice △ Inspection of various contracts. Nam Kyung-hoon, CEO of Gyeongnam Passenger Company, said, “Based on Yongin, our passenger company has expanded its routes nationwide, including Suwon, Seoul, Incheon, Gimpo Airport, Busan, and Gangwon. Public transportation “Legal stability is important as the service is directly related to the safety of citizens,” he said. “There are many legal disputes that arise when building infrastructure, and we will do our best to develop together through the capabilities and resources of both companies.” Daeryun CEO Kim Kook-il said, “We will provide comprehensive legal services for legal issues that may arise during the operation of Gyeongnam Passenger’s transportation service. There are many lawyers with experience as in-house lawyers and legal team leaders. “We can preemptively provide necessary legal help to companies,” he said. “We will pursue extensive cooperation so that we can jointly respond to specialized areas such as business management and investment.” Meanwhile, Daeryun operates specialized centers within the corporate legal group, including corporate advisory, corporate rehabilitation and bankruptcy, M&A, asset management, human resources and labor, and management rights disputes, providing legal services tailored to the characteristics of the case. Reporter Park Jun-sik (parkjs@wowtv.co.kr)[View full article] Daeryun Law Firm and Gyeongnam Passenger Company signed an MOU... “Expanding transportation business” (link)

Daeryun Law Firm is expanding its global legal services, including corporate overseas expansion, by selling overseas legal experts one after another. Daeryun Law Firm announced on the 12th that it has recently hired overseas legal experts, including attorneys Choi Young-jin, Kim Mia, and Lee Jae-yoon, and customs experts Myung Jae-ho and Kim Dae-ryun. Attorney Choi is an M&A expert who has advised on the acquisition of many overseas companies, including those in Vietnam and Canada. He also represented a domestic company in arbitration at an overseas arbitration center and helped a domestic local government establish an overseas office. Based on this experience, Attorney Choi plans to provide strategic advice for resolving international trade-related disputes and for companies to advance overseas. Attorney Kim is an overseas legal expert with excellent knowledge of visa and immigration law. We plan to provide legal support to individuals and companies, including managing complex administrative procedures and problems related to overseas expansion and finding solutions. Attorney Kim also holds qualifications as a general administrator and a foreign language translation administrator, so he can provide consulting services on all aspects of international business, including labor laws and contracts necessary for companies to attract overseas talent. Attorney Lee is a former member of the Regulatory Reform and Legal Affairs Office of the Ministry of Trade, Industry and Energy, and was in charge of advising on domestic industry and trade-related laws and overseas legislation. He is qualified as an international trader and has been in charge of various international trade dispute cases. Based on his experience, he plans to help companies resolve disputes that they may encounter during the trade process. Customs expert Myeong has accumulated expertise by supervising trade reviews at several companies and providing FTA consulting for executives and employees. Based on this, we plan to diagnose problems that companies may encounter in international transactions, such as customs duties, foreign trade, and foreign exchange transactions, and derive optimal solutions. Customs expert Kim carried out import/exit customs clearance and customs investigation response for various companies. Based on this experience, we plan to provide HS correction claims and strategic material export consulting required for companies with relationships with foreign countries. Daeryun plans to continue to build a system that can quickly and efficiently respond to various legal demands by intensively recruiting talent with global capabilities in international transactions and overseas corporate advisory. Daeryun Management CEO Kim Kook-il said, “This recruitment of overseas legal experts is an important strategic decision to strengthen Daeryun’s competitiveness in the global legal market beyond simply reinforcing human resources. “We will provide enhanced legal services to solve various problems faced by individuals and companies in the international legal environment.” Reporter Jeong Cheol-wook[View full article] Seoul Shinmun - Daeryun Law Firm continues to recruit overseas legal experts... Expansion of overseas legal services (link) Roishu - Law firm Daeryun launches ‘all-out offensive’ to recruit experts to expand overseas legal services (link) International News - Law firm Daeryun launches 'all-out offensive' to recruit experts to expand overseas legal services (Click here) Korea Economic Daily TV - Daeryun Law Firm begins expansion of overseas legal services (Click here) Korea Economic Daily - Recruiting a large number of overseas legal experts... Daeryun begins targeting companies operating overseas (Click here) Segye Ilbo - Law firm Daeryun launches ‘all-out offensive’ to recruit experts to expand overseas legal services (link) Legal News - Daeryun Recruits Experts to Strengthen Overseas Legal Services (Click here)

Low wages, non-payment of transportation expenses, false registration of manpower and meal expenses for preservation… Employee embezzlement: “Most of the proceeds from crime were spent on workers’ salaries.” The court ruled, “There is not much personal gain.” A warden who stole company money by falsely collecting labor costs to pay salaries to field workers was sentenced to probation. On January 23, the Seoul Northern District Court sentenced Mr. A, an office worker in his 60s, to eight months in prison and two years of probation on charges of fraud and embezzlement on the job. The court also ordered Mr. A to perform 80 hours of community service. While working as a superintendent at a construction site in 2023, Mr. A was indicted on charges of stealing company money by registering people who did not actually join the company in the company system, collecting labor costs, and falsely claiming meal allowances. In addition, he was also accused of embezzling about 20 million won by arbitrarily selling company products and embezzling cash. Mr. A admitted to all charges. However, complaints were raised on site because the company set wages lower than average, and it was claimed that the company falsely registered manpower to resolve this problem. It was also explained that the false meal claim was a response to the company's sudden non-payment of transportation expenses. In addition, he said that he sold the company's products according to the instructions of the deputy director, and that he distributed all the money he received from disposing of them to the workers. Regarding this, the court said, "The amount of money that the defendant swindled and embezzled is relatively large," but explained the reason for the suspended sentence, saying, "Most of the acquired money was used to pay salaries to field workers, and it appears that the personal profits he took were relatively small." He then explained the reason for sentencing, saying, “The defendant has reflected on and acknowledged all of his crimes, and we have taken into consideration the fact that he made a deposit for the victim.” Yang Ki-yeon, a lawyer at Daeryun Law Firm, who represented Mr. A, said, “If he did not consume or retain most of the proceeds of the crime, it is grounds for a reduction in the sentence for fraud.” He added, “It was recognized that most of the proceeds from Mr. A’s crimes were not used for personal purposes, so he was able to receive a suspended sentence.” Digital Content Team[View full article] Field manager who stole company money to pay salaries... Law ‘Probation of Execution’ Sentence (Shortcut)

The court ruled that if the insurance agent interfered with the notification of medical history at the time of signing the contract, the contract cannot be terminated for this reason. According to the legal community on the 20th, the Seoul Central District Court ruled in favor of the plaintiff in the insurance payment lawsuit filed by Mr. A, a man in his 50s, against the insurance company on January 21. Mr. A signed an insurance contract through insurance agent B in 2023. Afterwards, Mr. A, who received hospital treatment for myocardial infarction, claimed related insurance money. However, the insurance company The side refused to pay. The reason was that although Mr. A had suffered from high blood pressure and hyperlipidemia in the past at the time of the insurance contract, he did not disclose this, thereby violating the 'pre-contract notification obligation'. Mr. A was also notified of the termination of the contract. However, Mr. A filed a lawsuit, claiming that he informed Mr. B, who was in charge, of his medical history. However, he claimed that Mr. B only responded by asking him to check 'no' when asked about the relevant medical history at the time. At the same time, the company's contract termination was invalid. The court ruled in favor of Mr. A. The court said, "It is acknowledged that the plaintiff did not notify the fact that he had been diagnosed and prescribed medication at a hospital in the past," but pointed out, "However, this was because the insurance planner actively interfered with the notification." It continued, "If it had not been for the agent's actions, the plaintiff would not have provided inadequate notice," and ruled that the insurance company had an obligation to pay a total of 28 million won, including diagnosis and surgery fees, to the plaintiff. A's legal representative served as Mr. A's legal representative. Attorney Shin Seong-min of Daeryun Law Firm said, "Insurance planners have an obligation to explain the important contents of the contract in specific and detailed terms. If the contract is concluded without complying with this, the insurance contract cannot be terminated." He added, "In this case, even though Mr. A was informed that he had a medical condition at the time of signing the contract, he was induced to give a false answer, so it can be seen that he failed to fulfill his obligation to explain." Reporter Jeong Eui-jin (jej88@ikbc.co.kr)[View full article] ‘I signed up hiding my illness’... Law, “Insurance benefits must be paid” (Shortcut)