Corporate Litigation Assistance Case | Favorable Judgment in a Product Liability Reimbursement Suit

The client who requested assistance with corporate litigation was a pharmaceutical company that had manufactured and supplied medicines over a long period.

In the meantime, there was an announcement by the Ministry of Food and Drug Safety that a certain contaminant had been detected in some of the products supplied by the client in excess of the standard level.

Accordingly, measures for the recall, re-prescription, and re-manufacturing of the medicines were carried out.

As a result, the National Health Insurance Service came to bear medical expenses such as consultation fees and dispensing fees, and on this ground it filed a reimbursement claim against the client.

Faced with the sudden lawsuit, the client entrusted the corporate litigation response to a corporate attorney who had handled numerous product liability cases.

However, a person who must bear liability for damages may be exempted from liability if the person proves certain facts stipulated in the Product Liability Act.

▶ Product Liability Act, Article 4 (Grounds for Exemption)

▶ Related Precedent

The corporate law specialist attorney first closely analyzed various regulatory documents related to the case, such as the quality control guidelines and the test methods.

Through this, the attorney specified the scope of the duty of care that the client had to fulfill in light of the regulatory environment and technical level at the time of the case.

The attorney then systematically established a defense strategy to prove that there was no manufacturing liability within that standard.

The corporate specialist attorney focused on the situation in which, at the time, no testing method or management standard for the pollutant in question had been established.

The attorney organized the related technical limitations and regulatory gaps and then argued that the client had no duty to recognize or manage the existence of the impurity in advance.

Moreover, through expert opinions and materials, the attorney emphasized that at that point developing and applying a testing method was in practice impossible, and that the client had complied with the relevant regulatory standards.

As to whether the re-prescription and re-dispensing costs claimed by the corporation constituted a "loss" caused by a product defect, the attorney emphasized that those costs were in substance the result of an administrative measure for preventive purposes.

Through this, the corporate attorney clearly distinguished the nature of the loss and the legal requirements, and logically argued that it fell within a scope difficult to recognize as a loss under the Product Liability Act.

As with this corporate litigation, product liability disputes are complex and sensitive, and because an understanding of the relevant regulations and technology is critical, an even more specialized response is required.

When involved in a product liability dispute, it is therefore very important to consult promptly with a specialized attorney to accurately identify the key issues of the case and establish a systematic defense strategy.

Law Firm Daeryun provides clients with optimized assistance through the collaboration of specialists from various fields for each case.

In addition, based on case-handling data and experience, the firm analyzes the characteristics suited to the matter to establish an appropriate strategy and, where necessary, provides systematic evidence collection and a comprehensive response plan.

If you are involved in a product liability corporate dispute and need legal assistance, please request support at any time through a 🔗legal consultation booking.