Press Coverage

Chonbuk National University Law School and Daeryun Law Firm are joining forces to foster excellent lawyers. The two institutions signed a business agreement at the Chonbuk National University Law School on the 25th. The agreement ceremony was attended by officials from both institutions, including Director Jeong Young-sun and CEO Kim Kuk-il. According to this agreement, Daeryun plans to provide various practical experience opportunities to Chonbuk National University Law School students in the future. We also decided to continue human and material exchanges in the fields of education and research. Jeong Young-seon, dean of the Law School of Chonbuk National University, said, “I am glad that our students will be able to gain a variety of experiences necessary for legal practice.” He added, “I hope that the two institutions will contribute to the development of students as excellent lawyers through close cooperation and seek joint development in the field of law through joint research.” “Cooperation is also very important,” he said. “We will strive to help our students grow into excellent lawyers through more active cooperation with Chonbuk National University.” [View full article] News 1 - Chonbuk National University Law School and Daeryun Law Firm ‘Nurturing Excellent Legal Professionals’ Business Agreement (Shortcut)Nocut News - Chonbuk National University Law School and Daeryun Law Firm signed an agreement... Education and research exchange (Go to) Jeonbuk Domin Ilbo - Chonbuk National University Law School, signed an agreement with Daeryun Law Firm (Go to) (Go to) Jeonmin Ilbo - Chonbuk National University Law School - Daeryun Law Firm, mutual cooperation agreement for internships, etc. (Go to) NSP News - Chonbuk National University Law School - Daeryun Law Firm, business cooperation agreement (Go to) Veritas Alpha - Chonbuk National University Law Firm, business cooperation agreement (Go to) Signed an agreement with Daeryun Law Firm (Shortcut) (Shortcut) Law Journal - Chonbuk National University Law School, strengthens student capabilities...Signed an agreement with Daeryun Law Firm (Shortcut) Korea Teacher Newspaper - Chonbuk National University Law School, joins hands with Daeryun Law Firm (Shortcut) (Shortcut)

Presiding Judge Jeong Eun-yeong said whether the film, distribution or possession was in violation of the Sexual Violence Punishment Act, "It was not filmed against the other person's will... not guilty." A ruling was made to acquit a man who was indicted for capturing and keeping the nude and underwear images of the other person several times during a video call with his lover. On the 12th, Chief Judge Jeong Eun-young of the Cheonan Branch of the Daejeon District Court sentenced Mr. A, a man in his 50s, not guilty on charges of violating the Special Act on the Punishment of Sexual Violence Crimes (possession of filmed material using cameras, etc.). During a video call with Mr. B, with whom he had been dating from 2019 to 2021, Mr. A captured the screen of his cell phone showing the other person's body about four times. Since the other person in the video was wearing only underwear or was naked, Mr. A was charged with violating the Sexual Violence Punishment Act. According to the police investigation record, it was confirmed that Mr. B had an affair with Mr. A and then broke up. Afterwards, when Mr. A's wife discovered the screenshot and filed a civil suit against Mr. B, Mr. B reported that the video call was against his will. In this criminal trial, the main factor was that it was filmed by the victim, B, and that it was not filmed in a situation against the victim's will. Chief Judge Eun-young Jeong said, “The video information in the defendant's possession is a film of the victim's own body through a video call, and it was filmed against the victim's will. “No,” he said, and explained the reason for the acquittal, saying, “The defendant did not delete the captured photos but merely kept them and did not distribute or otherwise possess them. Punishment provisions cannot be applied retroactively.” Law Firm (Yuhan) Daeryun, who represented Mr. He explained, “It has a big impact on the judgment,” and “This case led to a not guilty verdict by proving the circumstances that the defendant’s actions were not carried out against the victim’s will and that the distribution and other actions were not carried out.” He continued, “Like the case above, things done in an intimate relationship between lovers sometimes lead to criminal charges after they break up,” adding, “In these cases, you may end up being investigated by an investigative agency overnight, even if you forget about it.” [View full article] - Court, man who captured and stored naked body and underwear while on video call with lover... What is the outcome of the trial? (Shortcut)

Consumers and sellers suffer damage due to non-settlement of Timon and WeMakePrice sales - Inquiries related to lawsuits increase rapidly... Accountants, tax accountants, and labor attorneys have joined the task force. As damage to consumers and sellers is increasing as the unsettled sales of Timon and WeMakePrice are spreading, Daeryun Law Firm (Lihan) announced on the 25th that it will gather related victims and file a class action lawsuit. Timon and WeMakePrice, affiliates of Singaporean e-commerce company Q10, were embroiled in controversy for failing to settle the price of products sold last May. It is also unclear whether the sales proceeds from June to July will be settled, so the damage to sellers is growing like a snowball. In fact, many concerned posts have been posted in small business communities, such as ‘All orders received have been cancelled’ and ‘I am anxious because the unsettled amount alone is tens of millions of won.’ Some sellers are also preparing for a prolonged situation by recruiting victims to participate in class action lawsuits. Consumer losses are also increasing as some sellers facing financial difficulties cancel product sales. In particular, the damage to consumers who have booked travel products is severe, and travel agencies that have not received payment are promoting a policy of canceling existing payments and repaying their own, leading to a series of cases where consumers are having to cancel their trips. Consumers can go through group dispute mediation procedures when 50 or more people suffer similar damage. However, there is a very high possibility that mediation will not be established, and even if a mediation plan is developed, it will only be at the level of a ‘recommendation’, so if the company does not respond, separate legal procedures, such as a lawsuit for damages, must be pursued. According to Daeryun Law Firm (Lihan), there are a series of inquiries about lawsuits from victims whose damages amount to hundreds of millions of won. Accordingly, Daeryun Law Firm (Lihan) is aware that inquiries surrounding the Timon and WeMakePrice incidents have continued regardless of whether consumers or sellers, and has formed a class action task force and begun establishing a rapid response strategy. In particular, considering corporate bankruptcy, experts such as accountants, tax accountants, and labor accountants also joined the task force. Daeryun Law Firm (Limited) Corporate Legal Group Head Won-il Won said, “You can file a claim for damages for default and a lawsuit for return of unjust enrichment,” and added, “As the scale and severity of the damage is serious, we will help consumers receive fair compensation through a class action lawsuit.” He also added, “If the delayed payment situation is not resolved quickly, we are concerned that small and medium-sized sellers will go bankrupt. To prepare for the worst-case scenario, we plan to prepare a lawsuit by cooperating with experts in various fields such as accountants, tax accountants, and labor attorneys.” Applications for class action lawsuits can be made on the consultation reservation page of Daeryun Law Firm (Limited) website. Meanwhile, Daeryun Law Firm (Lihan) is raising issues with the unfair refund policy of lodging platforms and is currently pursuing a class action lawsuit against Yanolja, a famous domestic lodging platform. Daeryun Law Firm (Yuhan) said, “As the lawsuits related to Timon, WeMakePrice, and Yanolja are all issues with a large social impact, we plan to form a task force with professional lawyers with extensive relevant experience to assist the victims.” [View full article] Segye Ilbo - Law Firm (Lihan) Daeryun pursues class action lawsuit for victims of Timon and WeMakePrice (Shortcut) Money S - "Concerns about possible bankruptcy"... Promoting a class action lawsuit for victims of Timon and WeMakePrice (Go to the link) Yonhap News - Law firms are recruiting victims of Timon and WeMakePrice to pursue a joint lawsuit (Go to the link) Edaily - Law firm Daeryun TF is formed to "promote a class action lawsuit for TimeMakePrice victims" (Go to the link) Medical Today - Victims of the 'Timon and WeMakePrice unsettled situation' are pursuing a class action lawsuit (Go to the link)

The story of a woman who had conflict with her in-laws after marriage was told. The woman claims that she was treated unfairly by her mother-in-law, and an expert advised, “It seems possible to file for divorce and alimony.” According to a JTBC report on the 22nd, the story of a woman, Mr. A, who said she felt unfair due to this conflict between her mother-in-law and her husband, was reported. Ms. A, in her 30s, was preparing to marry her husband and decided not to receive help from adults in both families. They agreed to have a ‘simplified wedding’ without any wedding favors or gifts. However, when her mother-in-law, B, found out about this, she looked down on her. It seems like he was disappointed that he couldn't even receive the same praise that everyone else received. Mr. B called Mr. A that way and scolded him, saying, “It’s too much to do.” He then asked, “Are your daughter and son the same?” and “Don’t tell your son, but send him 10 million won for the wedding gift.” Because she was planning to get married, Ms. A did not want to cause conflict, so she sent the wedding gift price to her mother-in-law late. She told this to her husband and received 10 million won for the wedding gift to give to her mother. Ms. A, who later married, became pregnant, but friction with her mother-in-law continued even after pregnancy. After hearing the news, the mother-in-law advised, “Even if you are pregnant, you must feed your husband for all three meals a day,” and “A wife should not ask to buy this or that at night.” Additionally, the medical staff recommended an emergency cesarean section to Ms. A, who was hospitalized ahead of her due date, but her mother-in-law strongly discouraged the cesarean section on the grounds that “the baby will be smarter and healthier if you give birth naturally.” He then suggested that I go to another hospital that offers natural childbirth. In the end, Ms. A's husband, who was angry, kicked her mother-in-law out of the obstetrics and gynecology clinic and gave birth to the child by cesarean section. Before giving birth, Ms. A named her child after her husband and herself, one by one. Her mother-in-law suggested the name, saying she had received the name from a famous monk, and she went on a hunger strike and ended up using that name. This wasn't the only thing. The mother-in-law threw the side dish that Mr. A's mother had made and sent from the countryside into the trash. However, the hair was all in the container, and the mother-in-law asked, “How can I feed this to my son and grandson?” But Mr. A was disappointed. Mr. A expressed his disappointment to his mother-in-law. The mother-in-law slapped her face, saying, “Why are you talking back so arrogantly? Did you learn that from your parents?” Ms. A turned her face away to avoid her touch, but her mother-in-law said, “She is that mother and that daughter,” and cursed her parents while pushing her head with her finger. He claimed that Mr. A, who was angry, shook off his mother-in-law's hand, but in the process accidentally grazed her mother-in-law's cheek. It is Mr. A's fault for touching his mother-in-law's cheek, whether it was a brush or something. At this, Mr. B got very angry and slapped Mr. A. They also hit other parts of the body and took out discarded food and threw it around the house. When her son returned home, the mother-in-law cried bitterly and said, “My daughter-in-law hit me like this.” When Ms. A explained, “That wasn’t it,” her husband raised his voice and said, “Get down on your knees and pray to my mother.” Eventually, Mr. A left home with his son. Regarding this story, lawyer Kim Dong-jin of Daeryun Law Firm told the Segye Ilbo on the 24th, “According to Article 840 (3) of the Civil Act, it is grounds for divorce when a person is treated extremely unfairly by a spouse’s immediate ascendant family.” At the same time, he explained, “You can file for divorce due to the other party’s fault,” and “Assault and verbal abuse are considered unfair grounds, and it appears that a claim for alimony is possible.” He advised, "However, there is a problem with proof. If there was any problem between the mother-in-law and daughter-in-law, it is important to prove it." [View full article] - Who is at fault?... “I don’t even make predictions” vs. “I accidentally hit my mother-in-law in the face” (Shortcut)

Experience working on the Certification and Fairness Commission as a certified professional prosecutor in the field of sexual crime-related cases at the Prosecutor's Office... Former Chief Prosecutor Oh Se-young, who has expertise in fair trade cases and was certified as a certified professional prosecutor in the field of sexual crimes, joined Daeryun Law Firm (Yuhan). According to Daeryun Law Firm (Yuhan) on the 23rd, Attorney Oh worked as a prosecutor at the Gimcheon Branch of the Daegu District Prosecutors' Office, the Daejeon District Prosecutors' Office, the Ansan Branch of the Suwon District Prosecutors' Office, and the Seoul Northern District Prosecutors' Office, as well as the Deputy Chief Prosecutor of the Seoul Central District Prosecutors' Office and the Incheon District Prosecutors' Office. He served as the chief prosecutor of the Seoul Southern District Prosecutors' Office and the Seoul Central District Prosecutors' Office. In particular, Attorney Oh is known to have served as the head of the Seoul Central District Prosecutors' Office's special investigation task force for digital sex crimes and investigated the Doctor's Room and the second N-room cases. In addition, he was in charge of many socially problematic sex crime cases, such as a case of suspicion of prostitution by the chairman of a large company, a case of forcible molestation by the former president of the Korea Economic Association, a case of quasi-rape by a famous professional baseball player, and a case of production and distribution of sexually exploitative materials targeting male children and adolescents. While serving as a prosecutor. At the time, in 2020, he was certified as a certified professional prosecutor in the field of sexual crime-related cases and had expertise in sexual crimes, child abuse crimes, and juvenile crimes. In addition, he served as a trial decision specialist in the Fair Trade Commission's trial management office for three years since 2002 and handled a variety of cases submitted to the committee, such as unfair collusion, abuse of market dominant position, and unfair support. Attorney Oh said, "I handled a variety of cases as a trial decision specialist for the Fair Trade Commission as well as sex crime cases. He said, "I will do my best for the interests of my clients based on the expertise in various sexual crime cases and fair trade cases that I have accumulated through my public service career." Kim Kuk-il, CEO of Daeryun Law Firm (Limited), said, "We expect that the expertise of the sexual crime response group and fair trade group will be strengthened by recruiting Attorney Oh." He added, "Starting with this, we will strengthen the expertise of each group to become a law firm that provides quality legal services." Daeryun Law Firm (Limited) is a law firm with the largest number of offices in Korea, and under the value of ‘customer-centered management,’ it has built the image of a large law firm that can be found closest to anyone anywhere in the country. [View full article]Dailyn - Former chief prosecutor Oh Se-young, the 'prosecutor in the doctor's room', joins law firm Daeryun (go) Aju Economy - [Law Firm Lounge] Daeryun recruits former chief prosecutor Oh Se-young, 'the prosecutor in the doctor's room' (go) Legal Times - [Law firm iN] Law firm Daeryun recruits former chief prosecutor Oh Se-young in the 'doctor's room case' (go)

Efforts to expand practical opportunities for prospective lawyers... Jeju National University Law School 'expects' to improve students' skills Jeju National University Law School (hereinafter referred to as Law School) announced on the 24th that it signed an MOU with Daeryun Law Firm (Yuhan) on the 23rd. At the MOU signing ceremony held in the professor conference room of Jeju National University Law School, CEO Kim Kuk-il of Law Firm (Limited), attorneys Oh Kyung-hoon, Ko Seung-seok, and Song Eui-seok of Jeju National University attended the ceremony. Law Institute Director Lee Yoon-seok, Department Head Kim Sang-heon, and Professor Ko Jun-seong and other officials attended. Daeryun Law Firm (Limited) currently operates 39 offices across the country, and in the Jeju region, the Jeju branch office is located within a 5-minute walk from the Jeju District Court and the Jeju District Prosecutors' Office, improving customer accessibility and convenience. Jeju National University Law School, which has produced numerous lawyers since its opening in 2009, is taking the lead in nurturing excellent legal professionals, including producing four successful applicants in this year's trial researcher selection process. This agreement was designed to provide students at Jeju National University Law School with opportunities for practical training and for human exchanges at the level of education and research. Kim Kuk-il, CEO of Daeryun Law Firm (Limited), said, "Daeryun is a global company by establishing branches beyond Korea and in Japan and the United States. “We are preparing to take a leap forward as a law firm. In realizing Daeryun’s vision, we consider cooperative relationships in each region to be important,” he said, adding, “We will do our best to foster talent through cooperation with Jeju National University, and we will actively help Daeryun in any areas that can be of help, including internships.” Lee Yun-seok, director of Jeju National University Law School, said, “Through this MOU, we will be provided with various opportunities, such as selecting essential topics for practice and classes focused on case analysis and practice.” “Jeju National University has relationships with many Korean lawyers, so we will actively help Daeryun Law Firm (Liuhan) advance into Japan,” he said. “Based on Daeryun Law Firm (Liuhan)’s solid plan, we expect that our students will be able to become true lawyers.” Daeryun Law Firm (Liuhan) will continue to provide high-quality practical opportunities to students and foster competent lawyers through close cooperation with law schools at universities in various regions across the country. I plan to go out. [View full article] - Jeju National University Law School - Daeryun Law Firm (Yuhan) signs MOU (Go here)

Attorney Hyun Byeong-hee of Daeryun Law Firm (Limited) Even if a couple divorces, if they have minor children, they will be responsible for raising them. In the event of a divorce, one parent becomes the custodian and takes care of the child, and the parent who does not have custody fulfills the duty of raising the child by paying child support. Even if child support is not properly received, the child can be reimbursed for the expenses incurred while raising the child. If there was no originally confirmed child support or a divorce was made without agreement on child support before the enforcement of the child support provision, the costs can be paid through a lawsuit for past child support even after the child becomes an adult. However, the Supreme Court ruled that the statute of limitations on the right to past child support does not run while the child is a minor and the child support obligation continues, but runs from when the child becomes an adult and the child support obligation ends, so past child support can only be claimed for 10 years after the child becomes an adult. On the 18th, the Supreme Court unanimously ruled that the right to claim posthumous child support for a minor child is only valid for 10 years from the time the child becomes an adult. In the case of child support, the Supreme Court precedent, which ruled that the statute of limitations does not run until a specific right to claim arises through agreement between the parties or a family court decision, has changed after 13 years. According to the current law, child support must be paid until the minor child reaches the age of 19, and if child support has not been received, past child support can be claimed even after the child becomes an adult. However, if past child support can be claimed indefinitely, there is a problem that those receiving the claim will have to spend their entire lives in a state of instability. In this regard, the Supreme Court ruled that it was necessary to apply a 10-year statute of limitations from the time the minor child reached the age of majority because it did not comply with the purpose of the statute of limitations system. The statute of limitations is a system that recognizes the extinguishment of rights due to non-exercise of rights for a certain period of time. In the case of general civil claims, the statute of limitations is 10 years, and if the right is not exercised within the period, the legal effect disappears. With this ruling, the statute of limitations for the right to past child support, like general claims, begins after the child becomes an adult. The Supreme Court's unanimous decision stated, "The statute of limitations for the right to past child support does not run while the child is a minor and the child support obligation continues, but runs from when the child becomes an adult and the child support obligation ends." While the child is a minor, child support may fluctuate, so it cannot be considered a complete property right, but once the child becomes an adult, the amount becomes fixed. Therefore, the purpose is that the calculation of the statute of limitations begins like a general claim. Accordingly, if you have not received child support, you will need to quickly prepare a lawsuit to claim past child support before the right to claim expires. This is because there is no legal way to respond after the rights are extinguished. At this time, it must be understood that past child support may be recognized differently from the amount claimed. When calculating child support in the past, in addition to the objective costs of raising children, various factors such as the parties' financial situation and fairness of burden are taken into consideration. If you want to receive maximum recognition for the amount claimed, you need to make sufficient preparations according to the advice of a legal expert. It is realistically difficult for an individual to prepare materials that will be accepted at trial. Therefore, if you have not received child support, which is your right as a custodian, you must take care of the first step, such as calculating the amount. [View full article] - [Contribution] Claiming child support can only be done up to 10 years after the child becomes an adult (link)

Expert: “At the time of birth, the fate of the child is at stake” Controversy is brewing after a woman in her 20s released a video saying, “I had an abortion at 36 weeks of pregnancy.” In this case, which occurred after the abortion law was abolished, the Ministry of Health and Welfare filed a complaint with the police accusing the woman of ‘murder’, and the police announced a strict response policy and began identifying the suspect. According to the police on the 22nd, a mandatory investigation was launched to identify the suspect in the video related to the recent claim by a YouTuber that she had an abortion at 36 weeks of pregnancy. The police, who received an investigation request from the Ministry of Health and Welfare on the 12th, assigned the case to the Seoul Metropolitan Police Agency's criminal task force and are speeding up the investigation by investigating a Ministry of Health and Welfare official as the complainant the next day. An official from the National Investigation Headquarters of the National Police Agency said at a regular press conference on the 22nd, “We executed a search and seizure warrant last week to identify the suspect.” When asked, “Did they search and seize YouTube Korea?” he answered, “It was a search and seizure of the media where the video was uploaded.” It has not yet been identified who the YouTuber in question is or who the doctor in charge of the abortion procedure was. Regarding this, the official said, "It will take some time to identify the person who posted the video, find out the facts, and determine the condition of the fetus." He added, "The exact situation and condition of the fetus must be confirmed before the charge is determined. If the abortion charge is found to be unconstitutional and the Ministry of Health and Welfare provides an opinion, we will review the law as a murder charge." Meanwhile, an expert who spoke to Segye Ilbo on this day said, “The 36th week of pregnancy is the time when childbirth is possible,” and added, “It appears that whether or not the child dies will determine whether a murder charge is established.” Under the criminal law, abortion was illegal for both the pregnant woman who caused the abortion and the doctor who performed the abortion, but in April 2019, the related article was ruled unconstitutional, and the crime of abortion was eliminated, so there are no punishment provisions. However, an official from the Ministry of Health and Welfare said, “We requested an investigation by referring to the court precedent that charged a doctor who aborted a 34-week fetus with murder,” and added, “We filed the complaint with the intention of asking for punishment if the facts (such as whether the abortion actually occurred) are correct.” The regulations that were determined to be unconstitutional are criminal laws, and the Enforcement Decree of the Maternal and Child Health Act (Article 15) allows abortions only within 24 weeks of pregnancy. However, abortion after 24 weeks of pregnancy is illegal under the Maternal and Child Health Act. Considering that there is no punishment for abortion under the criminal law, the Ministry of Health and Welfare requested an investigation on charges of murder instead of violation of the Maternal and Child Health Act. The legal community considers whether the child died at the time of birth as the key issue. Attorney Na-ri Park of Daeryun Law Firm pointed out, “Under civil law, it is important to determine whether the child was alive at the time of birth. If the child was alive, it can be considered murder.” However, he explained, “If the child was dead, it cannot be considered murder,” and “36 months of pregnancy is the time when you can give birth right away. It is clear that the child was born by cesarean section or induced labor, but there seems to be a high possibility that the child is alive.” He added, “The issue in this case is for the prosecution to understand the records after childbirth,” and added, “It appears that medical records or closed-circuit television (CCTV) can be decisive evidence.” He added, “Actually, if you look at the 2021 case law, the Seoul Central District Court sentenced an obstetrician to prison for causing death by burying the child after giving birth through induced labor at 34 weeks of pregnancy,” adding, “At that time, the crime of abortion had been abolished.” [View full article] - Are those in their 20s shaken by the suspicion of ‘36-week abortion’? Police identify suspect (link)

Law firm Daeryun refuses refund despite request for refund within deadline due to 'internal regulations', gathers consumers and prepares for class action lawsuit Yanolja "Refund within 10 minutes is rather a 'consumer protection policy'" The tyranny of the lodging platform Yanolja is rising to the surface. This is because even if consumers request a refund within a legal period after making a reservation, the refund is refused due to reasons such as internal regulations of the accommodation platform. Accordingly, consumers are preparing a class action lawsuit based on violations of the Electronic Commerce Act and the Terms and Conditions Act. According to Daeryun Law Firm on the 19th, it is recruiting consumers who have suffered damage from the accommodation platform to file a class action lawsuit. Although consumers expressed their intention to withdraw their subscription within a legal period, the fact that the accommodation platform refused to refund due to internal regulations became a problem. The areas that Daeryun took legal issue with were ▲violation of the E-Commerce Act and ▲violation of the Terms and Conditions Act. There are two things. First of all, according to Article 17 of the Electronic Commerce Act, the regulations related to withdrawal of subscription, consumers who purchased goods with mail order sellers can withdraw their subscription within a certain period of time. Most products traded under the Electronic Commerce Act can be withdrawn within a week. However, currently at Yanolja, you cannot get your money back unless you cancel within 10 minutes for products that are offered at special prices. According to Article 6, Paragraph 2 of the Terms and Conditions Act, clauses that are unfairly disadvantageous to customers, clauses that are difficult to predict, and clauses that limit fundamental rights are presumed to have lost fairness and are therefore invalid. Daeryun believed that Yanolja's refund policy was unfairly disadvantageous to customers. It is pointed out that fairness has been lost as the refund policy is favorable to Yanolja and unfavorable to the customer. A representative from Daeryun said, "I understand that if a refund is made with a short period of time left before the reservation date, Yanolja will have no time to resell the product, but 10 minutes is too short." He added, "Being able to cancel only within 10 minutes is extremely advantageous to the seller and unfavorable to the consumer." In response, Yanolja said, "Under the Electronic Commerce Act, we are a 'mail order intermediary' and have “It does not constitute a party to either party when concluding an accommodation contract between affiliated stores,” he said. “Due to the nature of accommodation products, resale opportunities are lost over time, so the provisions of the Electronic Commerce Act clearly state that cancellation of subscription does not apply.” Rather, the position is that a refund within 10 minutes is a 'consumer protection device' that allows cancellation even if the customer is negligent or simply changes his mind. Regarding the Terms and Conditions Act, he drew a line, saying, "The applicable subject is clearly defined in the law and there is no fact that our terms and conditions have been applied in the case, so it is not a case to discuss violation of the Terms and Conditions Act in the first place." Previously, Daeryun received a decision to provisionally seize the bond in a lawsuit against lodging platform Yanolja for the return of lodging fees. Currently, a lawsuit is being filed for refund of lodging expenses due to the policy of not being able to cancel same-day reservations. In 2016, a court ruling was issued stating that if you cancel a flight ticket purchased from an online shopping mall within a week, you can receive a full refund regardless of airline regulations. The purpose is to apply the Electronic Commerce Act, which stipulates that contracts unfavorable to consumers are invalid.  [View full article] - Yanolja "No refund after 10 minutes"... Angry consumer class action lawsuit (link)

■ Consumers are angry at the ‘refund only if cancellation within 10 minutes’ rule… A number of additional victims have been confirmed ■ Victims in the process of filing a claim for refund of lodging expenses have received a decision to have their bonds provisionally seized. Recently, as the number of cases of refunds being denied in the process of booking and canceling accommodations through online lodging platforms has increased, Daeryun Law Firm (Lihan) announced on the 17th that it has decided to recruit affected consumers and file a class action lawsuit. In particular, as the holiday season approaches, posts complaining about the refund regulations of lodging platforms are appearing one after another in online communities and social media. Even though they expressed their intention to cancel reservations within a legal period, lodging platforms unilaterally adopted a non-refundable policy, causing serious damage. According to the Korea Consumer Agency, the number of consumer consultations received in August last year, the peak summer vacation season, was 46,084, with consultations related to ‘hotels and pensions’ increasing the most at 96.4% compared to the previous month. The content of the consultation appeared to be mainly complaints about excessive cancellation penalties. According to Article 17 of the Electronic Commerce Act, consumers who have entered into a contract for the purchase of goods, etc. with a mail-order seller can express their intention to withdraw their subscription within 7 days from the date of receiving a written letter regarding the contents of the contract. If the consumer legally exercised the right to withdraw the contract, the seller must return the payment regardless of the reason, but many lodging platforms only allow cancellation requests within 10 minutes. The reservation system is operated by creating separate terms and conditions that allow for refunds. The accommodation platform claims that it is not subject to the law on the regulation of terms and conditions because it is only in charge of brokerage and is not a party to the contract. The lodging company also claims that it is not a party to the contract. Daeryun Law Firm (Limited) recognizes that there are many damages caused by the lodging platform's non-refundable policy and is taking the position of providing legal representation for the victims. Previously, Daeryun filed a lawsuit for refund of unfair profits once against the lodging platform on behalf of employee A. Mr. A made a hotel reservation through an accommodation platform, but immediately requested cancellation of the reservation. However, the lodging platform rejected Mr. A's request, saying that it would be difficult to issue a refund because the reservation was not canceled within 10 minutes. Accordingly, Daeryun Law Firm (Limited) filed a lawsuit against Yanolja, a lodging platform, on behalf of Mr. A. “We are currently receiving a flood of inquiries from consumers who have been harmed by similar cases,” he said. He added, “The refund policy created by the lodging platform violates several laws, including the Electronic Commerce Act and the Terms and Conditions Act, and is unfair because it excessively restricts consumers’ right to cancel without reasonable grounds.” He added, “We will help consumers exercise their reasonable rights.”  [View full article] - Daeryun Law Firm (Limited) pursues a class action lawsuit for victims of lodging platforms (Click here)