Press Coverage

The prohibition on unauthorized distribution is the same… Cases of complaints due to stricter social awareness ↑ Self-employed people say, "The era of flyers is over... It's hard to get out of the app." Self-employed people in the restaurant industry are trying to come up with alternatives such as distributing leaflets in apartments to escape the burden of delivery app fees, but some say it is not easy. Some franchise companies are strengthening their apps to cope with the burden of delivery app fees. On the other hand, self-employed people complain that it is difficult to promote without an app. This is because the advertising effect through distributing flyers is not great, and the number of cases of being accused of distributing flyers without permission has increased compared to the past. Recently, in the self-employed community 'I'm sick, I'm the boss', a story was posted about someone who was accused of property damage after handing out flyers directly in an apartment complex to promote them in order to get out of the delivery app. Person A, who posted the story, said, "A friend who used to curse at the delivery app said he would promote it by distributing flyers, so he spread out the (apartment) complex and even got a part-time job. “I sprayed it, but two weeks later, I received a call from the management office and a warning,” he said. “Yesterday, I got a call from the police station saying that I was accused of disrupting business and damaging property. Now, it seems absolutely impossible to go back to the era of iron bags.” Comments on the post included, “There is a desire to go to the era of leaflets, but this is the era of apps,” and “The carrot advertisement is a little better.” It ran. The post said, "It is common sense to ban the unauthorized distribution of advertisements. The store's image will be lost, it will be boycotted, and a fine will be levied." There were also responses saying, "Promotion must be done within the established framework in a way that does not cause harm to others." According to Kim Da-eun, an attorney at Daeryun Law Firm, unauthorized distribution of flyers inside apartments, etc. can be punished under Article 3, Paragraph 1, Item 9 of the Misdemeanor Punishment Act. Anyone who commits acts such as arbitrarily posting advertisements on other people's or organizations' homes, artificial structures, cars, etc., will be punished with a fine of less than 100,000 won, detention, or a minor fine. In fact, even before the advent of delivery apps, there have been complaints and punishments for cases of unauthorized posting of flyers inside apartments without permission from the management office. Attorney Kim said, "Regardless of the emergence of delivery apps, there are many regulations that existed before the emergence of delivery apps, and many advertisements were attached inside apartments before the emergence of delivery apps. “It seems that there was an atmosphere of customary acceptance, so there were many people who did not even know that it was a subject of punishment,” he said. “It is true that once a complaint is made, it is difficult to avoid punishment without actively fighting it legally.” [View full article] - Fines for distributing flyers incorrectly... Self-employed people say, “It’s hard to get out of the delivery app” (Shortcut)

Choi Yong-Hwan, Senior Attorney at Daeryun Law Firm (Limited) Legal Column A building delivery lawsuit is a lawsuit in which a landlord requests delivery of a tenant who illegally occupies the property even though he has lost the right to occupy the property. Usually, a lawsuit is filed when the lessee continues to occupy the property without permission, such as late payment of rent or delivery of the object due to expiration of the contract. If the tenant occupies the property without permission and does not vacate after a just termination of the contract, the landlord is bound to suffer great economic losses. In addition, there are many cases where landlords suffer because they cannot simply demand eviction due to legal protection measures for tenants. For example, there is a story of a landlord who waited for rent payment for several months considering the tenant's circumstances. The landlord sent several letters to the tenant requesting payment of overdue rent, but did not receive any response. Accordingly, as a last resort, a lawsuit was prepared. As a result of the lawsuit, the landlord was able to safely receive a decision to hand over the building. On the 8th of last month, the Changwon District Court ruled in favor of the landlord in the 'building delivery lawsuit' filed by the commercial landlord against the tenant for non-payment of monthly rent. The court ruled that “the lease agreement between the plaintiff and the defendant was legally terminated,” and that “the defendants had an obligation to deliver the building to the plaintiff.” The issues in the lawsuit can be broadly divided into two. First, the first issue was ‘whether or not there are arrears’. The plaintiff and the defendant signed a lease agreement for the property in this case in 2020 with a rental deposit of 20 million won and a monthly rent of 1 million won. The defendants had delayed payment of rent due to financial difficulties, but the plaintiff delayed the payment date in consideration of the defendants' difficult circumstances. However, the plaintiff did not receive the monthly rent even though the promised date had passed. The increased monthly rent amounted to 9 months' worth, and the defendants did not even pay the commercial management fee. The second is the 'legitimate notice of termination of the lease'. According to Article 10, Paragraph 8 of the Commercial Lease Protection Act, if the rent arrears reach three periods, the lessor can immediately terminate the lease even if there is any remaining contract remaining. In the case of the plaintiff, the arrears had already reached the 9th period, and the termination of the contract was notified through proof of contents. As the plaintiff's legal representative, I clearly presented the legal basis for the reason for the termination of the contract and requested real estate certification based on this. Thanks to this, the plaintiff was able to have the right to claim the return of the object recognized as the owner of the property. As in the case above, it is not difficult to see difficulties due to the tenant's loss of contact in a lease contract relationship. At this time, caution is required because if an appropriate response is not taken, such as a contract termination notice or eviction request, to a tenant who illegally occupies the real estate, the landlord may face backlash, such as a claim for damages. Additionally, responding by blindly visiting the tenant or unilaterally notifying the termination without examining the contract termination conditions may become an obstacle to legal action in the future. Typically, real estate litigation can take several months, so it is necessary to draw up a strategy from the beginning with the advice of a real estate attorney. [View full article] - If your right to ‘no contact with the tenant’ has been violated, you must file a lawsuit to take over the building (Go here)

Pizza Hut Korea loses lawsuit related to franchise fee difference... Shaking up the distribution industry, strengthening the franchise team within the corporate legal group... Daeryun Law Firm announced on the 12th that it has strengthened the franchise team within its corporate law group in preparation for the aftermath of Korea Pizza Hut's franchise fee differential lawsuit. Previously, the Seoul High Court ruled in favor of the plaintiffs in a lawsuit filed by Korea Pizza Hut franchise owners against the headquarters in September last year to claim the return of unfair profits. It was unfair for the headquarters to supply essential items such as raw and subsidiary materials without the consent of franchisees at a price difference. This is the purpose. Pizza Hut Korea, which is in danger of having to return more than 21 billion won in franchise fees, recently applied to the court to initiate rehabilitation procedures. Although the Supreme Court's final judgment is still pending, this lawsuit has caused great confusion in the franchise industry. This is because a significant number of franchise headquarters in Korea are making profits by charging differential franchise fees. In fact, it is known that franchise owners of some franchise companies are preparing related lawsuits. Daeryun announced its policy to reorganize the franchise team within the corporate legal group to reflect this industry situation and actively respond to related lawsuits. The franchise team is comprised of lawyers specializing in various fields, led by attorney Won-il Won, a former judge at the Seoul Central District Court and former head of the legal department at POSCO Future M. Attorney Won-sang Kim, who represented franchise owners in the Pizza Hut unfair profit refund lawsuit, The team is supported by lawyers Na Chang-soo, Shin Jong-soo, Park Seong-yoon, Kim Da-eun, Park Jong-woo, and Jeong Woo-young. They plan to provide higher quality legal services based on their experience working in various related organizations such as the Korea Fair Trade Mediation Service and the Franchise Business Dispute Mediation Committee. Won Hyeong-il, head of the Daeryun Corporate Legal Group, said, "It is expected that many similar lawsuits will be filed in the aftermath of the Korea Pizza Hut incident." “We strengthened the team by bringing in additional lawyers with experience,” he explained. Won-sang Kim, a lawyer from the franchise team who actually participated in the Korea Pizza Hut lawsuit, said, “The gist of the court’s ruling is that franchise fees that are not agreed upon in advance are unfair profits.” He added, “Both the franchise owner and the franchise headquarters need to understand these issues well and establish a customized strategy.” He added, “The Daeryun franchise team has completed legal preparations to respond to any case.” added. [View full article] Jose Ilbo - 'Korea Pizza Hut Aftermath' expected to be filed... Daeryun Law Firm Strengthens Franchise Team (Shortcut) Financial Today - Franchise industry worries about lawsuits after Korea Pizza Hut loses KRW 21 billion (Shortcut)

The court ruled that there was no debt for credit cards issued in stolen names. On September 30, the Seoul Central District Court ruled in favor of the plaintiff in a lawsuit filed by customer A against the credit card company to confirm the non-existence of debt. Mr. A, who was running a business, belatedly found out in 2021 that an employee had stolen his name and had been issued a credit card. As a result of checking the usage history with the credit card company, a balance of approximately 28 million won was accumulated for Mr. A. Mr. A denied the fact that the card was issued. It is said that the employee was issued a card using his/her own mobile phone and ID card. Therefore, it was argued that there was no obligation to repay the usage fee. However, the credit card company's position was different. It is confirmed that a direct phone call was made with Mr. A at the time of signing the contract, and that the card was delivered to Mr. A's workplace. In addition, he emphasized that the employee's unauthorized use of the credit card was caused by Mr. A's careless management of personal information and that he had an obligation to repay the debt. The court ruled in Mr. A's favor. The court said, “If you look at the call records submitted by the credit card company, the voice in the recording does not match the voice of Mr. A,” adding, “Rather, he is closer to an employee impersonating Mr. A.” At the same time, he explained that “the address to which the card was sent is not Mr. A’s place of business but the employee’s residence,” and that it cannot be considered that Mr. A entered into a contract directly. At the same time, “as long as the credit card contract for the plaintiff is not valid, the ‘management negligence’ claimed by the card company does not materialize,” and ruled, “there is no debt for the use of the credit card in question.” Lee Ki-eun, an attorney at Daeryun Law Firm (Limited), who represented the plaintiff, said, “The card company acted legally when issuing credit cards. “You must verify your identity according to the procedures,” he said. “When issuing a card, you must carefully consider whether the person requesting issuance is the one who received it.” Attorney Lee added, “Due to the credit card company’s mistake, the credit card was issued and delivered to an employee, not Mr. A.” He added, “In addition, we were able to obtain a reasonable result by taking into account the fact that the employee acknowledged that he had obtained and used the card by stealing Mr. A’s name.” [View full article] - A card secretly created by an employee... Court: “Issuance is invalid, no obligation to repay money” (Shortcut)

"I heard from the company that the day after my childcare leave, I will be clearing my desk. A new employee will be sitting there. I regret it." Mr. A, who recently took childcare leave due to his wife's birth, complains that he is afraid of the next six months. The company said they encouraged childcare leave, but as soon as he went on leave, they immediately cleared his place and put another employee in his place. Mr. A, who heard about this situation from his colleagues, complained, “I don’t feel at peace.” This is due to the belief that there may be disadvantages in personnel management or discrimination after reinstatement. As the low birth rate and aging population become more serious, the government is trying hard to increase the birth rate by encouraging child care leave, but in some parts of our society, there are many people like Mr. A who are concerned about child care leave. In fact, on the 10th, the day before the civic group Workplace Gapjil 119, there were many people who received counseling with concerns similar to Mr. A's in the report 'Suggestions for a workplace where pregnancy, birth, and childcare are possible', which included information on the current status of power abuse and system improvement regarding childbirth and childcare. As a result of the organization's analysis of 41 identified cases among e-mail reports related to pregnancy, childbirth, and childcare abuse received from January last year to May this year, the most common type of disadvantage (duplicate counting) was 'workplace bullying' at 63.4% (26 cases). In addition, 'unfair evaluation/appointment' (31.7%, 13 cases), 'refusal to work shortened hours, etc.' (24.3%, 10 cases), 'dismissal/recommended resignation' (12.2%, 5 cases), and 'refusal to use annual leave' (12.2%, 5 cases). Eight cases of power abuse that the organization found through public recruitment also said that it was not easy to use even basic systems such as maternity leave and childcare leave. Person A said, “When I said I would use childcare leave following maternity leave, the manager was very displeased and tried to persuade me not to use the leave.” In relation to this, the organization argued, “It is difficult to solve the problem simply by improving the maternal rights system and emphasizing the necessity of ‘resolving low birth rates.’ We need to raise overall working conditions and increase the effectiveness of the system from the perspective of gender equality.” He went on to point out, “Korean society is establishing a system to protect women’s labor rights and maternal and paternal rights, but this is not properly reaching the ground level.” Daeun Kim, a lawyer at Daeryun Law Firm related to parental leave, said in a phone call with Segye Ilbo that day, “The current parental leave system is continuously being reformed according to the needs of those eligible, and as social consensus on this is increasing, some companies are starting to guarantee the parental leave system as a basic rule, but are also proactively implementing a more active system for those on parental leave.” He gave an example, “In fact, at Daeryun Law Firm, the existing parental leave system is guaranteed as standard, and in addition, work from home is also guaranteed to ensure both child care and maintenance of income level.” “Nevertheless, there has not yet been a consensus on maternal protection, so there are many companies that do not properly comply with it. As a result, sanctions against companies that do not guarantee childcare leave are becoming increasingly stronger, and the standards for determining treatment for those on childcare leave are also becoming increasingly stringent and sophisticated,” he said. “With regard to work upon reinstatement after childcare leave, it is stipulated that after the end of childcare leave, employers must return to work that pays the same or equivalent level of wages as before the leave. He pointed out that “returning to the ‘same work’ as before should be considered as a priority.” However, he said, “If there are unavoidable reasons such as organizational reorganization, it is possible to return to another job, but even in this case, it is required that the job pays the same level of wages.” He added, “Therefore, rather than waiting for a report, it would be helpful to proactively inspect whether each company is properly guaranteeing this system or to implement a system such as providing government subsidies or corporate evaluation benefits to companies that sufficiently guarantee the parental leave system, so that each company can actively guarantee parental leave on its own.” [View full article] - “As soon as I took childcare leave, my position was taken away” Parental leave is still difficult (link)

“Guaranteed from before childbirth to raising children.” Male lawyers and employees also benefit from the welfare system, so there is no need to worry about work gaps due to the systematic management system. “Everything from the preparation period before childbirth to recovery and raising young children is covered, so I was able to focus on my family with peace of mind.” Jiyeon Kwak, an attorney at Daeryun Law Firm (Limited), returned to the office after completing 10 months of parental leave last May. When I first found out I was pregnant, my heart was full of worry. This is because lawyers, too, can never be free from career breaks due to so-called ‘pregnancy, childbirth, and childcare.’ However, contrary to expectations, the company’s response was very positive. The company conveyed that it was okay to fully focus on raising children, and thanks to the company's consideration, Attorney Kwak was able to prepare for childbirth with ease. “In fact, even if there is a system in place, if an atmosphere that is difficult to use is created, the reality is that you have no choice but to return,” said Attorney Kwak. “I was grateful that I was able to come back and work whenever I wanted even after taking a leave of absence.” Daeryun, which operates a systematic case management system to ensure no gaps in work, is contributing to the balance between work and family by implementing various maternity protection support policies. ‘Family-friendly law firm’ is one of Daeryun’s core management policies. In particular, we actively support women who are going through the process of childcare to maintain a stable corporate life and develop their careers after returning. What is worth noting is that after returning to work, we provide a variety of help to adapt to work, such as learning how to work and raise children in parallel, as well as adapting to work from senior employees. Not only that, but for employees who are worried about the economic impact of childcare leave, they have also established a 'work from home system during childcare period'. As a result of this pioneering implementation of a maternal protection policy, Daeryun's maternal protection policy is considered a role model for law firm welfare within the industry. Regarding concerns about work gaps that may occur when using the maternal protection system, a Daeryun official said, "Usually, at least 3 and up to 20 professionals are assigned to a single case," and "Chief Judge and Chief Prosecutor." “A veteran lawyer oversees the entire case, and there is a system in place where a team of professional lawyers constantly communicate and share the situation, so there are no concerns about gaps,” he said. Support for work-family balance... In the law firm industry, male lawyers and employees often do not benefit from work-family balance policies. In fact, the Korean Bar Association conducted a survey of 478 male lawyers last year, and 30% of respondents said they were unable to use maternity leave at all. Daeryun's welfare system is also open to male lawyers. Attorney Kim Tae-hwan, one of the beneficiaries of male parental leave, said, “It was useful because it encouraged people to use the maternity protection system regardless of gender. It is a necessary system for parents with young children, and guaranteeing it itself can be said to be a very good welfare.” This policy also applies to general employees, not lawyers, without exception. There are several employees who are currently using shortened working hours for childcare, as well as several employees who have returned from maternity/childcare leave and worked for more than several years. Daeryun plans to further expand the welfare system for work-family balance so that executives and employees can continue working without worrying about childbirth or childcare. Meanwhile, in addition to the current maternity protection system, Daeryun is also actively promoting employment policies for young people and middle-aged people. Regardless of gender and age, we are discovering talent with outstanding abilities in the field of support. We aim to contribute to the development of the local community and achieve sustainable growth. [View full article] Asia Economy - [Law Firm Now] Daeryun Law Firm adopts family-friendly management policy... Maternity protection system ‘eye-catching’ (Shortcut) Aju Economic Daily - [Law Firm Lounge] “Guarantees child rearing before birth”… Daeryun, maternity protection system ‘eye-catching’ (Shortcut)

Although he had his driver's license revoked for drunk driving, an administrative judgment found that it could have been invalidated if the procedure had not been legal. The Central Administrative Appeals Commission ruled on the 11th of last month to cancel the disposition in an administrative judgment filed by driver A, who objected to the police's decision to revoke his driver's license. Mr. A received a prior notice of cancellation of his driver's license when he was caught in a drunk driving crackdown on June 4. The notice states that he must attend a nearby police station by the 24th of the same month to give his opinion. However, on the 18th, six days earlier than the opinion submission date notified by the police, Mr. A's license cancellation process was completed. Mr. A argued, "It was unfair to dispose of the case before the appearance request date." In addition, "At the bottom of the statement presented by the police, there was an additional statement stating that even if the deadline for submitting opinions had not passed, there was an additional statement acknowledging that there was no objection and agreeing to the administrative disposition." He said, "This statement is inconsistent with the Road Traffic Act. He emphasized, "This is a loss of the opportunity to express one's opinion." In relation to this, the Administrative Appeals Committee said, "There was a phrase in the notice asking whether to agree to proceed with the disposition, but this was added arbitrarily, unlike the prescribed format." It said, "It is possible that Mr. A expressed consent without fully understanding the meaning." It also said, "The Road Traffic Act does not recognize exceptions for content added arbitrarily, such as the statement text," and "Administrative dispositions made before the deadline for submitting opinions have procedural defects." "You can see it," he pointed out. Attorney Park Sang-beom of Daeryun Law Firm, who represented Mr. A, said, "The purpose of the prior notification system is to give the parties the opportunity to raise objections," and pointed out, "The police's failure to keep the deadline for submitting opinions is a violation of Article 21 of the Administrative Procedure Act." He continued, "The phrase at the bottom of the statement also shows that Mr. A, who was a suspect, could not have easily refused the police's request to express consent." “It is,” he emphasized. [View full article] - License revoked for drunk driving. If there is a defect in the administrative process, it is invalid (go to link)

The nature of disputes between e-commerce platforms and users requires institutional supplementation to strengthen legal liability for default. With the rapid growth of the e-commerce market, the role of e-commerce platforms is becoming more important. However, legal issues arising from transactions brokered by platforms, especially disputes related to payment and consumer protection, continue to appear in a more complex manner. In particular, as various controversies, including payment delays, consumer refund issues, and platform financial instability, have frequently occurred recently, we met with Kim Yu-jeong, an attorney who is active in the e-commerce field, and asked about legal disputes between platforms and users. Please introduce yourself. As a member of Daeryun Law Firm's Fair Trade Group, I carry out litigation and advisory work in the fields of e-commerce and fair trade. It mainly deals with various legal issues, including disputes that arise in e-commerce platforms, especially payment issues between the platform and platform users. Please explain the transaction brokerage process of the e-commerce platform. When a consumer pays for a product registered by a seller on an e-commerce platform, the platform does not pay the money directly to the seller but deposits it with a payment agency such as a credit card company. After the transaction is completed by the seller delivering the product or providing the service, the platform settles the deposited amount to the seller. If a consumer files a complaint about a product, the platform mediates the dispute and proceeds with the refund or exchange process. At this time, the paid amount is refunded to the consumer through the payment agency. During this process, the platform manages transactions between sellers and consumers and adjusts their respective rights and obligations. This method can be seen as forming a structure that repeatedly creates and destroys debt relationships between sellers and consumers. How is damage compensated for e-commerce platform users? E-commerce platform users refer to consumers who purchase products or services and sellers who sell them. If an e-commerce platform does not settle payments to sellers or provide promised services to consumers, users can raise issues through the platform's own customer support center. However, if it is difficult to resolve the issue because the platform does not respond properly, the user may report it to the Fair Trade Commission (hereinafter referred to as the Fair Trade Commission), and the Fair Trade Commission may issue a corrective order or impose a fine. In particular, in the case of consumers, it is also possible to file a lawsuit for damages against the platform in accordance with Article 17 of the Act on Consumer Protection in Electronic Commerce, etc. (hereinafter referred to as the Electronic Commerce Act). What do you think about the recent ‘Timon-WeMakePrice incident’? The Timon-WeMakePrice incident clearly reveals the financial instability of e-commerce platforms and the resulting vulnerability to consumer protection, and suggests the need to legally clarify the platform’s responsibility as a transaction intermediary. This is because when a platform fails to fulfill its role, the damage goes directly to the consumer. In particular, I think the biggest problem is the lack of legal mechanisms in a situation that reduces trust between consumers and sellers. Accordingly, it is necessary to mandate transparency of the platform's financial status and fund flow and to establish a specific system to protect consumers. How is the legal responsibility for the issue of an e-commerce platform's inability to make payments defined? Pursuant to Articles 17 and 18 of the Electronic Commerce Act, e-commerce platforms are obligated to pay sales proceeds to sellers and respond to consumers' requests for refunds, regardless of financial status. In particular, if inaccurate information or payment delays related to payment are repeatedly provided in the process of brokering transactions between sellers and consumers, pursuant to Article 23 of the Fair Trade Act, sanctions such as a fine of up to 100 million won or a corrective order from the Fair Trade Commission may be imposed. In order to strengthen the legal responsibility of e-commerce platforms. The current E-commerce Act restricts the responsibility of e-commerce platforms, so more specific legal revisions are needed. First, to protect consumers and sellers, an institutional mechanism is needed to warn in advance about fund liquidity problems on the platform. It is also important to establish a payment guarantee system, which protects the payment amount for a certain period of time until the consumer purchases the product and the seller receives payment. In addition, specific legal supplementary measures are needed, such as preparing a plan for payment agencies, which are responsible for managing the flow of money and ensuring the stability of the payment process, to share some of the responsibility for the platform's financial problems. [View full article] - Legal dispute between e-commerce platform and users, what is the solution and direction for improvement? (Shortcut)

Changwon District Court Masan Branch Chief Judge Jeon A-ram said, “There is no direct evidence from the scene of the damage, and the motive for the crime has not been proven.” A defendant in his 50s, who received a summary order of fines for damaging a co-worker's car, requested a formal trial and was acquitted. Changwon District Court Masan Branch Chief Judge Jeon A-ram found Mr. A, in his 50s, not guilty on October 25 on charges of property damage. Sentenced. In October 2021, Mr. A was indicted on charges of scratching the car of his colleague B, which was parked on the road in front of the company where he worked, with a Buddhist sharp tool, incurring repair costs worth 3 million won. The prosecution claimed guilt using CCTV footage as evidence showing Mr. A leaving the company's main gate on the day of the incident, entering the passenger side of the victim's vehicle and then coming back out. Mr. A completely denied the charges. At the time, he was returning to his car after submitting his resignation letter to the company, and he felt like someone was calling him from the company side of the wall, so he went inside for a moment to check. At the same time, Mr. A emphasized, "I usually walk to work and do not know the employees' vehicles, and on the day of the incident, I did not know that the vehicle in question belonged to Mr. B." Chief Judge Jeon A-ram of the Masan Branch of the Changwon District Court, who heard the case, said, "Even if you look at the enlarged photo of the CCTV video, you can see that the defendant was in the damaged vehicle. “I could only see the scene of him going close to the wall and coming back through the passenger side,” he said, and ruled in favor of Mr. A on the grounds that there was no direct evidence of damage to the vehicle. Chief Judge Jeon A-ram also ruled that there was insufficient evidence to reveal Mr. A’s motive for the crime. During the previous trial, Mr. B claimed that he had had several conflicts with Mr. A over work issues and had once heard threatening words from Mr. A, but Chief Judge Jeon A-ram said, “I heard threatening words. The ruling ruled, “Mr. B failed to clearly state the circumstances, and there is no evidence to acknowledge that the defendant was aware of the victim’s vehicle.” Attorney Choi Yong-hwan of Daeryun Law Firm (Limited), who represented Mr. A, said, “A summary order of fine was initially issued to Mr. A, but he actively claimed innocence by requesting a formal trial.” Attorney Choi Yong-hwan continued, “In order to be punished for property damage, ‘intention’ must be clearly proven,” and “In this case, “In this case, there was not only direct evidence of vehicle damage, but also no clear motive for the crime, and the court appears to have taken this into consideration as well,” he explained. [View full article] - A man in his 50s who was summarily indicted on charges of damaging a colleague's car... acquitted after requesting a formal trial (link)

After the popular Netflix cooking competition program Black and White Chef aired, so-called 'scalping', in which restaurant reservation tickets for the cast members are sold at higher prices, has become prevalent. With more than 110,000 users flocking to make reservations for the restaurant that won the program's final winner, buying a reservation ticket has become a challenge. In fact, a post offering to purchase a reservation for two at the restaurant for 700,000 won appeared on various second-hand trading sites. However, the original selling price was only 100,000 won, raising the seriousness of illegal ticket scalping. Such illegal ticket trading is often found in our daily lives, and occurs in a variety of ways, from sports games to famous singer concerts. As of August this year, the number of scalping transactions reported to the professional sports scalping report center was 51,405, an increase of nearly eight times compared to 6,237 in 2020. The same goes for the popular music performance field, which is most affected by ticket scalping. According to statistics from the Korea Creative Content Agency's scalper monitoring center, the number of reports of scalpers in the performance field is increasing rapidly every year, from 359 in 2020, 785 in 2021, 4,224 in 2022, and 1,973 as of October last year. The reason scalpers can run rampant regardless of field is because the punishment was extremely weak. Selling ticket tickets was classified as a misdemeanor and was punishable by a fine of less than 200,000 won, detention, or fines. However, even this imposed fines only on on-site ticket scalping and failed to punish online ticket scalpers. As a result, it was pointed out that punishment was needed for all ticket scalping activities that took place both online and offline, and discussions on revising the law began in earnest. Afterwards, the illegal sales standards were supplemented, and the Performance Act and the National Sports Promotion Act were revised in March and September. What is noteworthy here is that the punishment has been greatly strengthened. In case of scalping, the seller will be subject to imprisonment for up to one year and a fine of up to 10 million won. The government did not stop there, but also announced plans to subdivide the punishment standards by size of profit and raise the level of punishment from the current level. As awareness of social problems related to ticket circulation is being strengthened, ticket transactions through illegal channels should be avoided as much as possible. As seen earlier, ticket scalping is a punishable matter regardless of whether it is online or offline, so it is best to reserve tickets through an official ticket office if possible. Nevertheless, if you are involved in a crime, it is advisable to consult with an expert to defend against the charges. [View full article] - ‘Illegal ticket scalping’ with increasing punishment, early response is important (link)