Press Coverage

Interview with Kim Dae-ryun, customs expert at the Dae-ryun Customs, International Trade and Arbitration Group. U.S. President Donald Trump announced that he would impose additional tariffs on automobiles and semiconductors following the imposition of a 25% tariff on imported steel and aluminum products. The so-called 'tariff war' of the second Trump administration is expected to intensify. As the U.S. tariff policy expands to various industries and other target countries, it is expected to have a significant impact on Korea, which has signed a free trade agreement (FTA). It is a time when it becomes important to prepare Korean export companies for universal tariffs. Daeryun International Trade, Arbitration and Customs Law Firm's International Trade, Arbitration and Customs Group has a variety of experts, including customs experts and accountants, collaborating with customs attorneys. In particular, team members with expertise in specific fields such as FTA origin verification, anti-dumping tariff response, and customs investigation response are providing customized consulting to companies. Customs expert Kim Dae-ryun, who recently joined the group, is a customs broker, bonded broker, origin manager, etc. As an expert in the customs field with a logistics manager qualification, on the 4th, he analyzed issues in the customs field and expressed his opinions on risk management strategies that companies should adopt in the global customs environment. The following is a Q&A with expert Kim Dae-ryun. Q. As trade between countries becomes more active, the need for experts in the customs field is increasing. What kind of work is usually performed? We advise on a wide range of tasks, including FTA consulting, product classification preliminary screening, customs assessment, and import/export requirements consulting, so that companies can proactively manage customs law risks that arise in the process of importing and exporting goods. In addition, we are responding to investigations that occur at customs, including customs investigations, customs dispute resolution, and foreign exchange inspections and investigations.Q. The customs field is a field that requires a variety of expertise, so there are likely to be many difficulties in handling the work. What difficulties do you have in performing your duties? Due to the nature of trade transactions, various goods are imported and exported, and transaction methods also vary. Understanding the product is essential in order to classify the product, which is the basis of customs duties. However, in the case of a newly developed product, there is a difficulty in that a lot of study is needed about the product and industry group.Q. As a customs expert, what are your opinions on recent customs issues? It is important to review the adequacy of the basic items of import declaration in the United States, such as item classification, dutiable value, and country of origin declaration, in accordance with the reasonable care obligation stipulated by the U.S. Customs Service (CBP). I think a more detailed response is needed, such as checking for roundabout export transactions of Chinese goods through the country, obtaining final confirmation of the country of origin through CBP Ruling, the U.S.'s authoritative interpretation of the origin, and managing risks related to additional tariffs.Q. What are the legal and institutional methods that can be used to reduce tariff risks? The areas where tariff disputes occur most often are product classification (HS CODE) and tariff evaluation. The U.S. CBP conducts preliminary screening for product classification and customs assessment as well as origin. To manage tariff risks, companies need to utilize the relevant system. In Korea, it is important to manage taxation risks in advance through pre-examination procedures such as pre-examination of product classification, pre-examination of taxable price determination method, and pre-examination of taxable price for special relationships.Q. Regarding customs issues, the role of the Daeryun International Trade, Arbitration, and Customs Group appears to be important. In relation to this, what services does the group currently provide? The group provides a variety of legal services, from origin consulting at the product production planning stage to pre-application for origin determination to CBP. Through these services, it is possible to determine whether additional tariffs are subject to additional tariffs by confirming the country of origin of exported goods, which greatly helps companies in establishing tariff strategies.Q. One last thing I would like to say. As the current global trade environment is rapidly changing, the impact of tariffs and trade regulations on corporate management is increasing. The pre-screening process often takes a long time. In particular, since the documents required for application are diverse and the contents are complex, it is recommended to seek help from an expert. Reporter Eunhye Lee (zhses3@joseilbo.com)[View full article] “Trump’s ‘tariff war’… Risk management is important through pre-screening procedures” (link)

The Supreme Court made a final decision to dismiss a case in which a person in his 70s transferred business funds and was later sued for return of the loan. The First Division of the Supreme Court announced on the 4th that it had confirmed the lower court ruling on December 26 last year in the appellate trial of a loan lawsuit filed by Mr. A, in his 70s, against the business owner, Mr. B. In 2016, Mr. A, who got to know Mr. B, the CEO of the company where his son works, gave 200 million won to Mr. B on two occasions in 2018. Mr. A claimed that the amount was a loan. The claim was that Mr. B complained of financial difficulties and asked for a loan. Then, Mr. A filed a lawsuit claiming that only 100 million won was returned through his son's account, and the remaining 100 million won was not returned. However, Mr. B said that he had never requested a money loan, and that he only delivered the amount necessary for the business at his request. The first trial ruled in favor of Mr. B and said, "The defendant received a loan from the plaintiff. After receiving the money, the money was sent to the company's account on the same day or the next day," he said. "Although the defendant is the CEO of the company, the plaintiff's son also serves as an executive director and owns shares." He also said, "It appears that the plaintiff was also involved in the operation of the company through his son," and ruled, "The 200 million won that the defendant sent to the plaintiff cannot be considered a loan." Mr. A, who was dissatisfied with the first trial ruling, appealed, but the second trial court said, "The plaintiff's appeal is The Supreme Court also dismissed the appeal and confirmed the lower court's decision, saying, "The reason is not much different from the claim in the first trial." The Supreme Court also dismissed the appeal and confirmed the lower court's ruling. Attorney Lim Seon-jun of the Daeryun Law Firm, who represented Mr. B, said, "If it was a loan, as Mr. A claimed, if it was a loan, he should have lent the money and received interest for a certain period of time, but he has not once requested repayment from Mr. B. Even looking at these facts, Mr. A borrowed an account in Mr. B's name to transfer business funds to a company he owns." said. Reporter Jeong Eui-jin (jej88@ikbc.co.kr)[View full article] After transferring business funds, "Return the borrowed money"...Law "It cannot be considered a loan" (Shortcut)

Union side: "MBK abandons Homeplus and focuses only on recovering investment" The Homeplus branch of the supermarket industry labor union directly criticized MBK Partners' excessive investment recovery strategy on the 4th in connection with the start of the corporate rehabilitation process, saying that its excessive investment recovery strategy has brought about a management crisis. On this day, the Homeplus union said, "Homeplus' management crisis is a tragedy caused by MBK's greed," and stated, "Government intervention is urgently needed." He then pointed out, "Despite Homeplus' financial difficulties, MBK has continued to pay dividends on redeemable convertible preferred stock and has not kept its promise to invest 1 trillion won. In fact, it has abandoned Homeplus and is concentrating only on recovering the investment." The union said, "The company did not reveal any specific reasons or plans other than its vague stance of 'maintaining normal operations,' and conducted everything in secret and there was no discussion with the union before applying for corporate rehabilitation procedures." They added, "The livelihoods of approximately 20,000 union members and their families are at risk. “Union members are suffering from extreme anxiety,” he said. The union expressed concern that the start of the rehabilitation process would lead to store closures and mass layoffs, and predicted, “Once the rehabilitation process begins, layoffs, wage cuts, and welfare reductions will be inevitable in the name of reducing fixed costs, and the worst-case scenario, such as store closures and asset sales, will become a reality.” At the same time, he lamented, “After the acquisition of MBK, we have already reduced thousands of direct employees and there is no cost to reduce any more.” The company must submit a rehabilitation plan by June 3 according to the procedures. Sales continue to rise, but rehabilitation procedures have begun. MBK acquired Homeplus for 7.2 trillion won through a leveraged buyout (LBO) in September 2015. The union claimed, “Homeplus was responsible for the borrowings and interest incurred in this process, and the company’s management condition became extremely poor,” and “MBK indiscriminately sold stores to repay the loans and reduced the size of the business, which led to a decline in credit rating and loss of long-term competitiveness.” According to the Financial Supervisory Service’s electronic disclosure system, Homeplus sales are based on the fiscal year (March to February of the following year) ▲2021 It continues to increase, including KRW 6.4807 trillion ▲ KRW 6.6 trillion in 2022 ▲ KRW 6.9316 trillion in 2023. As of January 31st of this year, sales for the previous 12 months amounted to 7.0462 trillion won. However, operating profit during the same period turned into a deficit: ▲2021 (KRW 133.5 billion) ▲2022 (KRW 260.2 billion) ▲2023 (KRW 199.4 billion). The accumulated operating loss in the third quarter of last year was 157.1 billion won, a 20.6% increase compared to the same period last year. Choi Cheol-han, secretary general of the Homeplus branch of the supermarket union, pointed out, "Currently, Homeplus stores are doing well. However, the reason for applying for corporate rehabilitation is probably because MBK is trying to recover its investment." He added, "MBK has tried to sell Homeplus for several years, but has failed every time. We cannot rule out the possibility that they will attempt M&A at a low price through split sales during this rehabilitation process." Won-sang Kim, senior attorney and head of the Corporate Rehabilitation and Bankruptcy Center at Daeryun Law Firm, said, "M&A and acquisition of real estate assets are possible even during the rehabilitation process, and there have actually been cases where real estate assets were sold at low prices." He pointed out, “Even if it was evaluated at 4.7 trillion won, it would not be possible to guarantee whether it would realistically be sold or cashed out.” He added, “Separately, salaries and severance pay for executives and employees must continue to be paid with priority.” Reporter Hwang Jeong-won (jwhwang@mt.co.kr)[View full article] Homeplus labor union "Corporate rehabilitation is intended to recover MBK investment... M&A concerns" (link)

Plaintiffs appealed for unfair use of “used for personal purposes” Prosecutors said, “There is no fact that the investment funds were used for personal purposes… acknowledged the worsening management situation” Controversy is rising as the CEO of an investment company, who was handed over to the prosecution on charges of stealing over KRW 1 billion in investment money, was found not guilty. On December 5 of last year, the Seoul Eastern District Prosecutors’ Office decided not to indict the company representative, Mr. A, who was sent on charges of fraud. Mr. A has been a victim for about a year since 2019. He received an investment of approximately 1.7 billion won from 13 people, but was accused of not returning the principal and interest. The plaintiffs claimed that Mr. A promised to pay a certain percentage of the profits compared to the investment, but did not even repay the principal and used the money for personal purposes. Mr. A completely denied the charges. They refuted that the failure to pay profits was because the borrowers did not repay the loans due to business difficulties due to COVID-19. At the same time, he emphasized that efforts are being made to collect the debt by requesting an order to seize the debt against the car owner who is in arrears. The prosecution determined that Mr. A was not guilty. The prosecution said, “After checking the transaction history of the company’s account, it was not confirmed that the suspect personally used the investment funds,” and “When looking at the financial statements, it is acknowledged that the company’s situation has worsened since 2019.” He added, “It appears that the court has accepted the request for a decision to seize and collect the debt against the borrower.” He added, “Considering the situation in which he informed the plaintiffs that there was a possibility of loss of principal, it cannot be said that the suspect deceived the plaintiffs.” He added. Attorney Park Seong-dong of Daeryun Law Firm, who represented Mr. A, said, “In order to constitute a crime of fraud, an act of deceiving the other party with intent must be included. In the case of Mr. A, it was acknowledged that he did not receive money due to the worsening business situation of the borrowers, so the charge was not established.” Reporter Kim Jong-cheol (jckim99@sportsseoul.com)[View full article] The CEO who received 1.7 billion won in investment and did not repay the principal and interest... Prosecutors say, “There is no suspicion of fraud” (Shortcut)

Listen to opinions and present solutions centered on the revised Pharmaceutical Affairs Act, including the CSO reporting system and disclosure of expenditure reports. March 7, 2 p.m., Daeryun Yeouido Headquarters Conference Room. While tensions are rising as regulations on illegal rebate issues within the medical and pharmaceutical industries are recently strengthened, a seminar for pharmaceutical and bio companies will be held. On March 7, at 2 p.m., Daeryun Medical & Pharmaceutical Group will hold a conference in the conference room of Daeryun Headquarters in Yeouido, Seoul. It was announced on the 28th that a seminar will be held under the theme of 'issues and practice of compliance - focusing on the revision of the Pharmaceutical Affairs Act'. This seminar was prepared to prepare for the pharmaceutical sales salesperson (CSO) reporting system introduced from 2024 and the expenditure report disclosure system on details of providing economic benefits, which is being implemented in earnest from this month. Daeryun will discuss in depth the current issues and response measures that arise in the process of introducing compliance, focusing on lawyers specializing in pharmaceuticals, biotechnology, healthcare, and fair trade. The seminar will be held on this day with a total of 4 topics. First, in the first session, attorney Choi Yun-jeong, a pharmaceutical expert with a pharmacist qualification, will give a presentation on the topic of ‘Pharmaceutical companies and CSOs’ expenditure report preparation and disclosure system.’ Attorney Yoon-Jeong Choi will explain the CSO reporting system, how to prepare expenditure reports, and related issues, focusing on the revised Pharmaceutical Affairs Act. In the second session, Attorney Gye-Jun Son, head of the Corporate Legal Group, will make a presentation. Attorney Gye-jun Son, a former secretary of the Fair Trade Commission, plans to introduce pharmaceutical rebate regulations under the Fair Trade Act and the Fair Trade Compliance Program (CP). The third session will be led by advisor Myeong-soon Choi, who is considered an authority in the medical and pharmaceutical industries. Advisor Choi Myeong-soon, who has worked for about 30 years at the National Health Insurance Corporation and the Health Insurance Review and Assessment Service, will give a presentation on the practice of post-management of supply details related to pharmaceutical distribution, expenditure reports, and administrative dispositions for drugs that disrupt the distribution order. In the final session, tax accountant Jeong-oh Lim will give a presentation on the topic of ‘tax issues that arise when kickbacks are discovered.’ Tax accountant Lim Jeong-oh, who has provided tax adjustment and advice to hospitals, clinics, and manufacturing companies, will analyze various cases and provide help in preparing response strategies based on this. This seminar is open to anyone involved, including pharmaceutical, bio, and corporate legal personnel, free of charge. Applications for participation can be made on the Daeryun website. Kim Kook-il, CEO of Management, said, “This seminar was prepared to listen to the difficulties faced by pharmaceutical and bio companies regarding rebate regulations, such as the CSO reporting system and disclosure of expenditure reports, and to suggest practical solutions.” He added, “As this is an opportunity to share and communicate with current issues, we ask for your interest and participation.” Meanwhile, Daeryun Medical Pharmaceutical Group announced its plan for ‘Evergreening Patent Strategy’ in January 2025. We have successfully completed the first seminar on the theme of ‘Understanding the Law,’ and we plan to hold seminars encompassing various fields in the future. Reporter Dong-wook Son (twson@lawleader.co.kr)[View full article] Law Leader - ‘Pharmaceutical/Bio compliance issues and countermeasures’...Daeryun Medical/Pharmaceutical Group seminar held on the 7th (Go here) Roisch - “Discussion of pharmaceutical and bio compliance issues and countermeasures”… Daeryun held seminar on the 7th (Go here)

Last year, the contract with the GS E&C and HDC Hyunsan consortium was canceled and a 7-person dedicated team was formed... “We will prove that the other party is at fault.” The Seongnam Bank Jugong Apartment Reconstruction Association, which has been in a legal conflict with the existing construction company, has selected a legal representative and entered into a full-fledged lawsuit. Daeryun Law Firm announced on the 27th that the Bank Jugong Apartment Reconstruction Association held a delegates' meeting for the lawsuit against the construction company on the 21st and appointed Daeryun as its legal representative. Previously, in April of last year, the union sued GS Engineering & Construction and HDC Hyundai Development Company, the existing construction companies. The contract with the consortium was terminated. They were selected as construction companies in 2019, but it was later confirmed that they were unable to narrow the difference in position between the union and the construction cost. Accordingly, the construction group requested the return of the bidding deposit of approximately 27.2 billion won that had been paid to the union in advance and damages for approximately 27.3 billion won in profits expected to be earned upon completion of construction. The union ultimately selected Daeryun as its legal representative after reviewing proposals received from a number of law firms. Daeryun has 7 members. We plan to form a dedicated team to respond. First, Park Jeong-gyu, head of the Construction and Real Estate Group, who previously served as a judge in the construction division, will be led by lawyers Kim Kwang-deok and Kim Hyeong-jin, both former members of large construction companies. Here, various experts, including Seon Yu-ju, a lawyer specializing in redevelopment and reconstruction registered with the Korean Bar Association, real estate lawyers Dae-hee Kang and lawyer Shin Young-sik, and lawyer Nam Young-jae, a former in-house lawyer at a POSCO Group affiliate, will also provide legal assistance. Attorney Dae-ryun Park, who represented the union, “The issue at issue in this lawsuit is to examine whether the cause of the cancellation of the construction contract is on the construction team or the union,” he said. He added, “We will highlight the fact that the construction team did not properly carry out the original contract and increased the construction cost beyond a reasonable range, and prove that the union is not at fault in the contract cancellation.” Reporter Hwang Jun-ik (plusik@tf.co.kr)[View full article] The Fact - Seongnam Bank Owners Association appoints Daeryun Law Firm... Entering into litigation with GS·HDC (Click here) Sports Seoul - Seongnam Bank Owners Association appoints large law firm before lawsuit against GS and HDC (Click here) Roishu - Seongnam Bank Owners Association appoints large law firm before lawsuit against GS and HDC (Click here) Edaily - Seongnam Bank Owners' Association, GS E&C, HDC Hyunsan and construction cost lawsuit battle (Go here)

A man in his 50s who was sent on charges of emotional abuse to a child after fighting in front of an acquaintance's children was transferred to the prosecution on charges of emotional abuse by assaulting his father in front of his children. According to the legal community on the 27th, the Busan District Prosecutors' Office on the 10th decided not to indict a man in his 50s, A, who was accused of child abuse. Mr. A was involved in an argument with his acquaintance B in August last year. He was accused of inflicting emotional abuse on children, including hitting Mr. B in front of his children. Article 17, Paragraph 5 of the Child Welfare Act strictly prohibits acts of emotional abuse that are harmful to children's mental health and development. ‘Emotional abuse’ also includes exposing children to domestic violence. However, Mr. A denied the charges. He said there was a slight scuffle with Mr. B at the time, but there was no assault or physical contact. At the same time, he emphasized that the assault scene is not properly revealed in the CCTV footage of the scene, and that there is no objective evidence other than the statement of the victim's family. In particular, it was argued that Mr. A's actions did not constitute emotional abuse. ‘Domestic violence’ refers to an act involving physical, mental, or property damage between family members, with the intention that Mr. A cannot be considered a family member. The police reported that Mr. A was guilty of child abuse and forwarded the case, but the prosecution decided not to indict him. The prosecution explained, “If we view all of these as ‘acts of emotional abuse’ defined by the Child Welfare Act simply because the child has been exposed to violence and other acts, virtually all criminal acts that occur in front of the child will be included in the scope of punishment, resulting in an over-expansion of criminality.” He then said, “If the suspect is a mere third party and did not inflict direct violence or verbal abuse on the child victim, the scope of application must be reasonably interpreted in consideration of the legislative purpose and language of the Child Welfare Act when determining whether or not there is a charge.” Attorney Jihye Kwon of the Daeryun Law Firm, who represented Mr. A, said, “A ‘family member’ is defined as a spouse or former spouse, a direct ascendant, a cohabiting relative, etc., and Mr. A did not fall under this category.” “There was no intention to inflict emotional abuse on his children, and it appears that the prosecution judged this situation comprehensively,” he said. Digital Content Team[View full article] Is it child abuse if you fight in front of your children? People in their 50s who were sued, prosecutors' office decided not to indict (Shortcut)

'Freelance' workers should also be protected from workplace bullying. Recently, controversy arose when it was reported that the late MBC weather caster Oyo Anna made an extreme choice after suffering from 'workplace bullying' during her lifetime. It is known that the deceased had been subject to verbal abuse from co-workers for a long time, and although he confessed his grievances to company officials at the time, he was not properly protected. Afterwards, MBC announced that it would begin an investigation into the truth, but the criticism does not appear to be subsiding. According to Article 76-3 of the Labor Standards Act, if anyone becomes aware of workplace harassment, he or she may report the fact to the employer, and the employer must conduct an investigation into the parties without delay. It is part of the so-called 'Workplace Harassment Prohibition Act' that has been in effect since 2019, and in order to fall within the scope of this law, the person concerned must first be classified as an 'employee' under the Labor Standards Act. Therefore, it has been constantly pointed out that some non-regular workers, such as freelancers, who are not normally considered 'workers', are bound to fall into the blind spot of the anti-workplace harassment law. Mr. Oh also worked as a ‘freelancer’ at a broadcasting company. The problem is that many broadcasting companies employ a large number of freelancers to manage their workforce. According to the 'Status of Irregular Workers and Freelancers in Broadcasting Companies' report published by the Korea Labor and Society Research Institute in 2020, out of 16,676 workers in the domestic broadcasting industry, 6,999 are irregular workers and freelance workers, which is 42% of the total respondents. Accordingly, the party and government began enacting related laws to resolve blind spots in the law. The People's Power Party and the Ministry of Employment and Labor have decided to enact a special law (tentative name 'Oyo Anna Law') that allows punishment for serious workplace harassment even if it occurs only once. In addition, People Power Party lawmaker Kim Jang-gyeom proposed a bill to amend the Labor Standards Act, which would recognize the “worker self-respect” of freelancers such as weather casters and allow them to be subject to workplace harassment regulations, separate from the enactment of a special law. Although it appears that related measures are being prepared one by one, there are still issues that need to be resolved. The most urgent thing is the process of objectively establishing standards for judging bullying (persistence and repetition). In addition, it seems necessary to revise and supplement the legal provisions to ensure that there is no bias in the company's actions when an incident of bullying occurs within the company. I hope that the day will come when all workers can be protected through effective legislation. Small and Medium Business Team[View full article] Five years after the anti-bullying law in the workplace was implemented, what tasks remain? (Shortcut)

In the first trial, "causing loss to the national budget and misappropriating embezzlement money for personal purposes"... Sentenced to 3 years in prison Appellate trial "There was no additional investigation into the surrender... Considering the fact that some of the damages were repaid" A soldier who embezzled hundreds of millions of won while working in accounting at a military unit had his sentence commuted in the appeals court. According to the legal community on the 26th, the 6-1 Criminal Division of the Seoul High Court was indicted on the 14th on charges of violation of the law on aggravated punishment for specific crimes. At the appellate trial of Mr. A, a soldier in his 40s, the original trial ruling, which sentenced him to three years in prison, was overturned and he was sentenced to one year and six months in prison. Mr. A was accused of embezzling approximately 200 million won 564 times over a period of one year by registering his account in the transportation fee payment system for full-time reservists in 2021. At the time, Mr. A committed this crime by unauthorized access to the administrator account of the unit's fund management system. It was confirmed. The first trial sentenced Mr. A to 3 years in prison. The court said, "Despite the fact that he must perform his official duties with morality and integrity, the nature of the crime is bad in that it caused a loss of the national budget amounting to 200 million won," and "The embezzled money obtained was used for personal purposes and no loss has been recovered to date." Mr. A filed an appeal on the grounds of unfair sentencing. Mr. A surrendered to the military police before the investigation began, but the investigation was not conducted. He claimed that he did not do so. In addition, he appealed for leniency, saying that he had repaid part of the damage through the insured insurance. The appellate court ruled that the sentence of the original trial was heavy and unjust. “Even though the head of the investigation team heard the defendant’s surrender, he sent him back to wait for the attendance request and did not conduct any additional investigation,” the court explained. “This act of the defendant is equivalent to surrender, which is a special mitigating factor in the sentencing guidelines.” It added, “The defendant’s insurance contract “100 million won of the damage was recovered through insurance payment,” he said, adding, “In addition, we took into account the fact that the defendant used most of the embezzled money for living expenses, including raising children, and the fact that he is reflecting on the crime,” and stated the reason for sentencing. Attorney Kim Young-soo of Daeryun Law Firm, who represented Mr. “We were able to receive a significant reduction in sentence by emphasizing the fact that the damages were repaid along with the claim that self-reliance was established,” he said. Reporter Ko Young-min (youngman@ikbc.co.kr)[View full article] A soldier who stole 200 million won by accessing an administrator's account without permission. Sentence reduced on appeal (Go here)

Installing stakes in the only passage, ‘violation of the right to freedom of passage’ vs. ‘For the purpose of protecting the fence and inducing safe driving’ Suwon District Court Pyeongtaek Branch “Consent to use has a bond effect and there is no hindrance to the passage of people or general vehicles.” There was a case where the court did not accept a request for a provisional injunction to prohibit traffic obstruction filed by a factory owner against a nearby land owner, claiming that a stake installed on the only road leading to the public road made it impossible for vehicles to drive. Suwon District Court Pyeongtaek Branch Civil Division 1 (Presiding Judge Jo Jeong-woong, Chief Judge) It was confirmed that Judges Young-min Jeong and Yun-jin Kim) decided on December 18 last year to dismiss the application for a provisional injunction filed by factory owner A against landowner B. In this lawsuit, Mr. A claimed, “Mr. B is blocking the traffic by putting up stakes on the only road leading to his factory,” and “Mr. He emphasized, “The right to freedom of passage has been violated.” In response, Mr. B countered, saying, “The fence along the road was frequently damaged by vehicles heading to Mr. A’s factory, so to prevent this, we simply installed props to encourage safe driving of vehicles.” In addition, he requested that the claim be dismissed, saying, “If you reduce your speed and adjust your turning radius, you can pass through the passage without any problems.” The Pyeongtaek branch of the Suwon District Court, which heard this case, ruled in Mr. B’s hand. The court accepted. The court ruled that “there may be inconveniences in the passage of vehicles driven by creditors due to the piles installed in the passage,” but that “there is no hindrance to the passage of people or general vehicles.” He then dismissed Mr. A’s claim, saying, “Although we received permission for use from the previous owner, this cannot lead to approval from the current owner, the debtor.” Attorney Park Hyeong-geon of Daeryun Law Firm, who represented Mr. B in this trial, said, “For the prohibition of obstruction of passage to be granted, the creditor’s actions must be taken into account.” He said, “There must be circumstances that show that the debtor’s freedom of passage was violated, such as interfering with the debtor’s daily life.” He also said, “Mr. A passed through the section without any problems even after the piles were installed, so the court appears to have ruled that there were no justifiable circumstances.” Reporter Son Dong-wook (twson@lawleader.co.kr)[View full article] Request for temporary injunction to remove piles that ‘impede vehicle movement’... Court rejects “passage is possible due to damage to piles” (Go here)