Press Coverage

As the U.S. Supreme Court ruled that reciprocal tariffs based on the International Emergency Economic Powers Act (IEEPA) are illegal, the market is raising the possibility of tariff refunds worth about $166 billion. However, despite the possibility of tariff refunds, domestic export companies are often unable to take practical responses due to complicated procedures and the burden of hiring local experts. In particular, while the U.S. Customs and Border Protection (CBP) is expected to operate the refund system (CAPE) around the 20th of this month, The industry's response goes beyond simple refund applications and extends to objections and lawsuits. Myung Jae-ho, a customs expert at Daeryun Law Firm, explained, "If we check in advance key elements such as identifying the refund entity, managing the settlement point, and designing the refund receipt structure, we can sufficiently increase the possibility of a refund." He also added, "We can respond more efficiently by using a domestic law firm that directly cooperates with a local U.S. law firm without an intermediary law firm." He selected 'confirmation of the claimant' as the factor that needs to be checked first. He explained, "About 6,000 companies, or 25% of the approximately 24,000 companies exporting to the United States, are transacting under DDP conditions in which the exporter bears the cost of customs duties, so there is a possibility that they may be eligible for a refund." He added, "We need to check 'who can claim it' before whether a refund is possible," he explained. Tariffs are paid by the importer of the United States (IOR) in customs clearance. Commissioner Myeong explained that there are many cases where it is written down, and in reality, there are many structures that make it difficult for Korean companies to claim refunds directly. In particular, in DDP transactions, cost burden and legal rights are often separated, so he emphasized that it is necessary to first review how the tariff burden and refund rights are established in the contract. He then explained that it is important to manage the schedule before and after 'tariff settlement (Liquidation)' when proceeding with the refund process. Before tariff settlement (Liquidation) Although corrections can be made relatively easily through a post-summary correction (PSC), it becomes difficult to respond if the protest procedure goes through after settlement. Commissioner Myeong reiterated that 'timing management' is most important because it usually takes about 314 days to settle, and objections must be raised within 180 days. Applying for a refund does not mean 'automatic payment'. The U.S. Customs and Border Protection (CBP) presents each procedure based on the taxpayer's application rather than a lump sum automatic refund, and CBP is only an agency that executes refunds and does not have the authority to judge whether customs duties are illegal. Commissioner Myeong added, "For this reason, only part of the refund may be granted or rejected, and in the event of such a dispute, it is likely to lead to a lawsuit in the U.S. Court of International Trade (CIT)." These include securing an import declaration (entry), confirming the schedule for calculating and settling customs duties, and registering an account to receive a refund. Commissioner Myeong said, “Recently, CBP is considering paying refunds only through electronic transfer (ACH),” and added, “If you do not have a US account, a bypass receipt structure through a third-party agent must be prepared in advance.” Furthermore, the customs structure itself is recently changing to the form of ‘basic tariff + additional tariff.’ He also pointed out that companies should keep this in mind. He said, "In the past, a certain level of tariff was applied regardless of whether FTA was applied, but now, with the shift to the 'basic tariff + additional tariff (10%)' structure, the actual burden varies depending on whether or not the FTA is utilized." He added, "Proof of origin is also an important variable. Even if it is domestically produced, if key raw materials are imported, it may be difficult to recognize the origin." Separately, it is important to note that Article 232 of the Trade Expansion Act and Article 301 of the Trade Act, Tariffs, Dumping, and Countervailing Duties (AD/CVD) remain in place. He said, “There is a possibility of introducing additional tariffs based on Section 122 in the future, so there is a need to reorganize the mid- to long-term tariff strategy separately from whether or not to refund.” Lastly, Commissioner Myeong said, “Tariff refund is not a simple cost issue, but a complex area where contract structure, customs clearance method, and dispute response are all connected.” He added, “In practice, there is a possibility that CBP will increase the intensity of response by requesting submission of additional data through information request (Form 28) or delaying refund review. He pointed out, “For companies that are not prepared, the refund process may be prolonged or lead to unfavorable results,” and “It is important to approach strategically in the early stages, as the results vary greatly depending on preparation.” He also added, “Tariff refund lawsuits must be filed within two years, and in this case, around April 2027 is expected to be the final deadline, so now is the best time to prepare a response, as the rights may not be exercised if preparations are delayed. “It’s a point in time,” he added. Eunhye Lee (zhses3@joseilbo.com)[View full article] U.S. tariff refunds need a ‘strategic approach’ rather than a simple cost issue… “Timing for settlement and objection is key” (Shortcut)

A soldier in his 20s was put on trial on charges of swearing at a specific superior in his unit, but was found not guilty by the court because it was recognized that the remarks did not refer to a specific person and did not have a performance nature. According to the legal community on the 7th, the 3rd Regional Military Court acquitted Mr. A, in his 20s, who was indicted on charges of insulting his superior last month. Mr. A was indicted on charges of making insulting remarks against a specific superior in a situation where his remarks could be heard by people around him within the unit. However, Mr. A denied the charge, saying he had never made the problematic remarks. In addition, it was argued that even if the remark had been made, it was difficult to identify the other party as it was more like a dissatisfied self-talk. The court found him not guilty based on the statement of another unit member, Mr. B, who was at the scene at the time, saying, “I heard the remark itself, but I did not know who it was directed at.” In order for an insult to be established, the victim must be identified and the expression must be likely to be spread, but according to Mr. B's statement, Mr. A's remarks do not meet these requirements. Attorney Seo In-ho of the Daeryun Law Firm, who represented Mr. A, said, "In this case, the key point was whether the remarks met the requirements for criminal punishment rather than whether Mr. A made the problematic remarks. As a result of the dispute focusing on whether a specific target was identified and whether the expression had the potential to be spread externally, a not guilty verdict was reached." Reporter Jeong Cheol-wook[View full article] Soldier ‘not guilty’ on charge of insulting superior officer in unit… Court, “There is no performance without referring to a specific person” (Shortcut)

Daeryun Law Firm announced on the 6th that it signed a business agreement (MOU) with the Korean-Chinese Association at its main office in Yeouido, Seoul on the 31st of last month and decided to provide legal support to foreigners residing in Korea. The agreement ceremony was attended by officials from both sides, including CEO Park Dong-il of Daeryun and Oh Seong-ho, president of the Korean-Chinese Community Association. Starting with this agreement, both sides plan to establish a counseling system for foreigners residing in Korea who cannot receive legal help due to language barriers or institutional unfamiliarity. In particular, the scope of support has expanded beyond simple immigration and visa issues to include contract disputes, investment advice, labor-related issues, and civil and criminal cases that may arise during business management. The Korean-Chinese Korean Association is an organization established in 2015 that operates community-based projects and community volunteer activities for Korean Chinese and foreigners residing in Korea. The association expects that this cooperation with Daeryun will be able to raise the level of legal welfare within the community to a higher level. Oh Seong-ho, president of the Korean-Chinese Association, said, "There are many legal problems experienced by Chinese people staying in Korea," and "I believe that a more systematic legal response will be possible through cooperation with Daeryun." Through this cooperation, Daeryun has also taken a step closer to expanding the global market. Park Dong-il, CEO of Daeryun Law Firm, said, "We will actively utilize Daeryun's global legal network and collaboration system with local lawyers in China," and added, "We will lay the foundation for foreigners residing in Korea to receive legal services without discrimination." In fact, Daeryun is accelerating the expansion of its cross-border legal network connecting Korea and overseas, including recently joining hands with Tahota, a large Chinese law firm. Reporter Cheon Ju-young (young1997@mydaily.co.kr)[View full article] Daeryun Law Firm and the Korean-Chinese Korean Association signed an MOU for legal support for foreigners residing in Korea (Click here)

Prosecutors accused of buying real estate with about 280 million won from wife who had embezzled funds: “Ordinary apartment sale process… It is difficult to believe that the fact of embezzlement was hidden” The prosecution cleared the husband, who was accused of hiding criminal proceeds by purchasing real estate with money embezzled by his wife. According to the legal community on the 6th, the Ansan Branch of the Suwon District Prosecutors' Office handed over the case to the prosecution on the 27th of last month on charges of violating the law on the regulation and punishment of concealment of criminal proceeds. Mr. A, a man in his 60s, was cleared of any charges. Mr. A has been under investigation for allegedly receiving and hiding about 280 million won of the approximately 3.5 billion won in funds that his wife, a company accountant, had embezzled while working. The issue of the investigation was whether, despite knowing about his wife's embezzlement, he received a large amount of money transferred to her account and used it to buy real estate, such as an apartment and a new building. Mr. A completely denied the charges, saying, “Because my wife was in charge of all household expenses and income management, I did not even know the details of the account transactions in my name.” He continued, “I had no idea of the embezzlement until my wife went to turn herself in to the police.” He added, “The funds to purchase the real estate in question were also funds given by my mother. He claimed, “It was purchased by combining the existing deposit.” The prosecution accepted Mr. A’s claim, saying that the process of selling his apartment seemed to be a normal flow. The prosecution said, “According to the real estate transaction details, the apartments purchased in the suspect’s name are part of the normal apartment sales process, such as acquiring a house from a non-owner or disposing of an existing house and acquiring a new house,” and judged, “There are no circumstances confirmed to suggest that excessive property was acquired through criminal proceeds.” Regarding the account in Mr. Attorney Dae-ryun of the law firm explained, “According to Article 4 of the crime of concealment of criminal proceeds, it must be clearly proven that he was aware of the circumstances. Just because he is a family member, it cannot be concluded that he was aware of another person’s crime and conspired to collect the proceeds.” He added, “In this case, it is a case where the wife was able to be cleared of the unfair charge of being an accomplice by proving through objective financial transaction details that she was the one in charge of managing the household finances.” Reporter Mi-ji Kim unknown@kyeonggi.com[View full article] “Buying real estate with money my wife embezzled?”... Husband accused of being an accomplice ‘acquitted’ (link)

The representative of a shipbuilding company's partner company was sent to the prosecution on suspicion of tax evasion by issuing false tax invoices exceeding billion won in the name of another person, but was cleared of the charges by proving that only the name was different and that he actually provided construction services. According to the legal community on the 2nd, the Tongyeong branch of the Changwon District Prosecutors' Office decided not to indict Mr. Mr. A, who runs a shipyard subcontracting company, was accused of creating a business in the name of another person, such as a family member, for the purpose of avoiding taxes, and issuing false tax invoices worth 1.4 billion won dozens of times. However, although it is true that Mr. A operated the business in the name of another person, he denied the charges, saying that it was not a fictitious transaction in which only tax invoices were issued without actual transactions. Although he ran several work teams with his family, he actually carried out the construction as one company, so he claimed that only the name of the person issuing the tax invoice was different and that he provided construction services to the main contractor normally. The prosecution determined that Mr. A's claim was true based on the content of the conversation he had with the quantity team employees via messenger and the details of remittance of the construction payment received from the main contractor to the team members. Even if the tax invoice was issued in the name of another person, the actual construction service was provided according to the information stated in the tax invoice. If services were provided, the charges were dismissed due to insufficient evidence in accordance with the Supreme Court precedent that a fake tax invoice issued without a transaction cannot be considered. Attorney Cho Ik-cheon of Daeryun Law Firm, who represented Mr. A, said, “We presented as objective evidence the fact that Mr. A’s work team actually provided construction services to the main contractor. We logically explained the multi-level subcontracting practices in the shipbuilding industry and the legal principles of Supreme Court precedents, and we were able to receive a non-prosecution by proving that there was no intention in the fictitious transaction.” said. Reporter Jeong Cheol-wook[View full article] Representative of a subcontractor accused of issuing false tax invoices worth KRW 1.4 billion... Acquitted of charges by proving actual construction (link)

Interview with lawyer Nam Kwon-yul of Daeryun Law Firm “Looking for a part-time translation job. Guaranteed high profits” Ms. A, a woman in her 20s, boarded a plane to Laos in 2022 after receiving an offer for a high-profit part-time job. Mr. A's life suddenly fell into the abyss after he had hopes for a new beginning. As soon as I arrived at the site, my passport was taken away, I was imprisoned, and I was assigned work. After escaping at the risk of her life, she returned to Korea, but she was investigated as a suspect rather than a victim. The prosecution viewed Ms. A as a key manager of a voice phishing organization worth about 170 million won and requested 10 years in prison. The prosecution presented as key evidence that the IP address used in the crime and Mr. A's financial account access address were the same. However, the first trial court found Mr. A not guilty. According to the Ministry of Foreign Affairs, the number of reports of Koreans being detained in Cambodia increased from 1 case in 2022 to 330 cases (January to August) last year. It was found that these criminal organizations mainly lure young people through social media with phrases such as ‘Recruitment for a large overseas Telemachine branch in Southeast Asia.’ In relation to this, lawyer Nam Kwon-yul of Daeryun Law Firm, who represented Mr. A, emphasized, “Overseas high-paying part-time jobs are likely to involve college students in their early or mid-20s with no social experience,” and added, “It is better not to even try because there are cases where they are indicted without actually committing a crime.” Attorney Nam is below. Q&A. - In this case, how was the victim of employment fraud identified as the voice phishing manager? ▲The defendant was a victim who had his passport taken away and imprisoned locally after being deceived by the words ‘highly profitable translation part-time job.’ The only basis for the prosecution's indictment was 'IP address'. The IP used to access the voice phishing malicious program server matches the IP used by the defendant to access his personal financial account. Based on this, the prosecution viewed the defendant as a key manager of a criminal organization that directly managed the server and requested 10 years in prison. - The focus of the defense of the suspect was ▲ Focused on digging into the technical blind spots that the investigative agency had missed. First, the uniqueness of the local network environment in Southeast Asia was emphasized. In places such as Laos, hundreds of people use a method of sharing one public IP (CGNAT). Therefore, it could not be concluded that it was the defendant's terminal based solely on the IP address match. Additionally, the defendant only had about 8 months of experience working as a development assistant in the local area. It was strongly expressed in court from the beginning that it was technically impossible to directly manage a malicious program server that requires advanced security technology. - The specific grounds for the first trial court's decision to acquit all are three main reasons. First, this is the initial statement left at the embassy immediately after escaping. The 'raw truth', written only to survive without legal calculations, became a decisive shield to break the prosecution's logic of collusion. Second is the composition of the local organization. Since most of the members were Chinese, it was difficult to view it as a voice phishing organization that required fluent Korean. Thirdly, there is a lack of objective evidence. As a result of the investigative agency's forensics, no malicious programs were found on the defendant's electronic device. - The fundamental reason why innocent participants repeatedly occur in Southeast Asia is because it is strongly characterized as 'large-scale human trafficking' that exploits the desperation of young people. They are lured overseas with high profits, and as soon as they arrive there, their passports are taken away and they are imprisoned in a space cut off from the outside world. Young people who lack social experience have no choice but to succumb to this extreme violence and pressure. However, investigative agencies only focus on the results of 'being at the crime scene' and ignore the structural violence as to why they were unable to escape from there. The limitations of these superficial investigations are the cause of wronged victims being transformed into perpetrators overnight. - When involved in an overseas voice phishing incident, the response strategy according to the damage situation. ▲ The key is where to focus the defense. If you are a simple participant, you must prove that you were a low-level assistant who only received a fixed salary and not a profit share. On the other hand, in cases where the person was forcibly taken away by coercion, as in this case, it is necessary to secure as much as possible the 'initial statement' before legal calculations are involved, such as the embassy rescue request letter mentioned above. Reporter Kwon Byeong-seok (bsk730@fnnews.com)[View full article] “Strategy when involved in a high-paying part-time job in Southeast Asia”... How to respond to a suspect whose 10-year sentence was overturned (link)

The court refuted the claim that “I grabbed her hand by surprise,” saying, “I only touched it because I was worried about her hand shaking.” The court said, “There was actually a symptom of shaking hands, and there was nothing unusual before or after the act… no intent to molest was proven.” A man accused of making surprise physical contact with a woman he met for the first time was found not guilty in court. The Seoul Central District Court found Mr. A, who was indicted on charges of forcible harassment, not guilty on the 18th of last month. In 2024, Mr. A was accused of assaulting B, a woman he met through social media, by surprise, holding her hand while they were talking offline for the first time. The prosecution believed that Mr. A was guilty and requested a summary order of a fine of 5 million won, which the court also accepted. However, Mr. A objected and requested a formal trial. During the trial, Mr. A completely denied the charges. At the time of the incident, Mr. B's hands were shaking violently, and he only held his hands to calm them down. The court found Mr. A not guilty. The court said, “The place where the incident occurred was an open road with a sign saying ‘CCTV recording in progress.’” He added, “There were many people passing by, so the actions of the two people were fully identifiable.” He continued, “At the time of the incident, the victim actually had symptoms of shaking his hands, and there was nothing unusual about the actions or reactions of the two people before and after the specific point when the defendant held her hand. Considering this, there is ample room to believe that the defendant touched the victim’s body out of concern for her condition, so it was a case of molestation.” He added, “It is difficult to say that intent has been proven.” Meanwhile, lawyer Seo Bong-ha of Daeryun Law Firm, who represented Mr. A, said, “As a result of analysis of the CCTV footage, the location was an environment where harassment could not occur as it was on the main street with all sides exposed enough for about 30 passers-by and many vehicles to pass by for 10 minutes.” He added, “Mr. “We were able to find out that there was no intention,” he explained. jckim99@sportsseoul.comReporter Kim Jong-cheol[View full article] Man accused of forcibly molesting a woman he met for the first time by holding her hand... Law: Not guilty due to “no intent” (Shortcut)

Column by American lawyer Dong-hoo Son of Daeryun Law Firm (Limited) The number of so-called ‘flip’ cases of moving headquarters overseas to attract global investment and successful overseas expansion is increasing. The number of Korean companies attempting to enter the global ecosystem by establishing local joint ventures (JVs) is also increasing. According to a media report, the number of domestic startups that conducted flips increased six-fold in 10 years from 32 in 2014 to 186 in 2024. This suggests that for export companies, restructuring their governance structure in line with global standards is no longer an option but an essential gateway to growth. However, a hasty push for a flip could actually be detrimental. This is because you may face an unexpected tax bomb or management crisis. This is a tragedy that occurs when only superficial procedures are followed without a professional understanding of ‘cross border’ work, in which the laws and systems of both countries are complicatedly intertwined. We must be aware that a flip that is not preceded by a thorough legal diagnosis can become a fatal trap that is strangling the company, and we must thoroughly check the legal risks. The first difficulty we face is the tax burden. The flip is carried out by exchanging existing Korean corporation stocks for newly established U.S. holding company stocks. At this time, there is a high risk that Korean tax authorities will regard this as an actual transfer of stocks and impose a large capital gains tax. If the tax treaties and tax laws of both countries are not analyzed at the same time to design a legal tax-saving structure, a situation may arise where the founder has to pay hundreds of millions of won in transfer taxes without actually receiving cash, depending on the valuation at the time of stock exchange. In addition, the threat to management rights caused by the differences in the corporate law systems between Korea and the United States cannot be overlooked. The U.S. state of Delaware, where many companies head, broadly recognizes the ‘principle of business judgment’ and strongly protects the authority of the board of directors. However, paradoxically, in order to keep this in check, American investors put strong pressure on entrepreneurs through ‘contracts’ rather than laws. They control the board of directors by inserting detailed protective provisions, such as an extensive right of veto, into investment contracts, and after the fact, they actively utilize shareholder lawsuits to challenge directors' violations of their strict fiduciary duties. Ultimately, if the toxic clauses contained in the local standard investment contract cannot be filtered out, there is a high possibility that the founder will lose actual management leadership or become embroiled in enormous litigation risk, despite having a nominal equity advantage. In fact, there are many cases where founders of famous domestic startups were effectively excluded from the board of directors after Series B. The risk of violating the Foreign Exchange Transactions Act that arises during the capital transfer process is also fatal. This is because omitting Korea's foreign exchange prior reporting obligation or violating procedures can escalate into a criminal risk that will result in investigation by investigative agencies. Therefore, if the regulatory networks of both countries are not carefully examined, successfully attracted funds can suddenly become shackles that can shake the existence of a company. In other words, overseas capital movement is a highly complex project that goes beyond simple contract review and can only be completed when the laws, systems, and regulatory systems of both countries are aligned. Ultimately, the key to solving all these problems lies in practical cross-border capabilities. Korean and American laws differ not only in language but also in the regulatory systems surrounding companies. It should not be overlooked that decisions made solely based on U.S. law may directly violate the taxation logic of Korean tax authorities or foreign exchange transaction law regulations. With the existing fragmented method in which large domestic law firms delegate practical work to local law firms, it is difficult to understand the organically intertwined legal issues of the two countries in a timely and three-dimensional manner. In addition, there is a risk that communication will be delayed in urgent situations. Therefore, for companies that are about to take a full-fledged global leap forward, it is essential to have the assistance of a working expert who can apply the legal standards of both countries at the same time and formulate a detailed strategy. Beyond the fragmentary review of documents, lawyers from both countries should be able to communicate in real time about a single case and come up with a comprehensive solution. In a structure where the headquarters in Korea and local lawyers in the U.S. provide separate advice on the same case, the gap becomes a risk. The success or failure of the flip ultimately depends on whether the legal environments of both countries can be controlled simultaneously within one strategy.[View full article] ‘Flip’ has increased 6-fold in 10 years... How do we prevent global tickets from becoming ‘poisonous’? (Shortcut)

Youngjin Ahn, attorney at Daeryun Law Firm, has frequently asked questions from clients who have been involved in voice phishing cases. The question is, why are multiple police stations across the country contacting me even though I only participated in one crime? This stems from the characteristics of voice phishing cases, where investigative jurisdiction is determined based on the region where the victim occurred. From the suspect's perspective, there is great fatigue from having to repeat the same investigation multiple times, but the real problem is that if each person goes to trial, the final sentence may be much heavier than expected. In this situation, the most important strategy in practice is 'merging', which brings together scattered cases into one. This is because it is more advantageous for the defendant to have multiple cases judged at once in one trial than to be sentenced separately. This is in accordance with the principle of handling concurrent crimes stipulated under Article 37 of the Criminal Act, and in practice, this results in the overall sentence being lowered each time a person is sentenced. In our experience, the effect of reducing sentences is approximately 20%, so merging is not a simple administrative procedure but a practical response to the defendant's right to defense. However, it is rare for investigative agencies to merge cases on their own. In particular, it is difficult to expect mergers at the police stage due to jurisdictional issues, so actual attempts at mergers begin in earnest from the point when the case is transferred to the prosecution. In this case, it is necessary to go beyond simply submitting a written document, and to explain in detail to the prosecutor's office in charge that multiple cases against the same suspect are in progress, and then collect the cases at the local jurisdiction office. This is a point where efforts must be made to unite the scattered flow of cases through active communication with investigative agencies. If some cases have already gone to trial, a more elaborate response is needed. The key is to match the ‘progress speed’ of the entire incident. For cases indicted first, the date should be adjusted so that sentencing is not carried out quickly, and for cases still under investigation, it should be urged that indictments be carried out as quickly as possible. This is because once the sentence is handed down, it becomes virtually impossible to merge it with the case indicted later. Ultimately, the aspects of voice phishing cases vary depending on how this complex timing is managed. Of course, it is not easy to unite cases scattered across the country. This is because it requires an arduous process of individually checking and coordinating the different progress of the police, prosecutors, and courts. However, the legal results when cases are merged through such strategic efforts are clearly different from those where cases are not merged. In the end, the decisive key to lowering the actual sentence in a voice phishing case lies in a carefully designed response strategy from the beginning of the investigation. ● Contributions by external writers may differ from the editorial direction of this paper. Gyeonggi Ilbo webmaster@kyeonggi.com[View full article] [Contribution] Hidden variable that influences voice phishing sentences, ‘case merging’ (link)

Recently, the Seoul Administrative Court increased the number of courts dedicated to school violence from 2 to 4. This measure is in response to a steep increase in the number of related cases filed since the establishment of a dedicated court in 2023. In fact, the number of annual school violence administrative litigation cases filed with the administrative court rapidly increased from 51 in 2022 to 134 in 2025. In effect, the final destination for resolving school violence cases is the court. Behind the intensifying legal response from parents and students, there is a sense of crisis that the results of the School Violence Review Committee's disposition are directly related to the students' future. Disciplinary records from the Academic Violence Committee under the Office of Education remain in the school records and have a fatal impact on future career paths, including college entrance exams. In fact, out of 3,273 test takers with a confirmed history of school violence in the 2026 college entrance exam, 2,460, or 75%, were found to have failed. However, recently, there have been frequent cases where even simple fights or misunderstandings have become excessively controversial and resulted in unfairly severe disciplinary action. There was also a case where a playful conversation between classmates led to a transfer, but the court ruled to cancel the decision after reconciliation with the victim was recognized. This suggests that there is a clear opportunity to correct unreasonable dispositions through school violence administrative litigation. Attorney Kim Dae-won of Daeryun Law Firm (Limited) said, "For a successful school violence administrative lawsuit, it is essential to collect objective and clear evidence from the early stage. First, if you have been unfairly identified as a perpetrator or received excessive disciplinary action, you must focus on proving that the act did not meet the requirements for school violence. Reveal the context of the case through messenger conversation details, factual confirmation from surrounding students, etc., and identify procedural flaws in the school violence committee investigation process and the appropriateness of the level of disciplinary action. “There is a need to argue legally,” he explained. He continued, "On the contrary, the victimized student must prevent secondary damage caused by the offending student's harsh punishment or the school's lukewarm response. They must persuade the court by arguing the illegality of the existing disposition based on objective data such as hospital medical certificates and psychological counseling records." Attorney Kim Dae-won said, "What is important to note is that the effect of disciplinary action is not suspended just by filing a lawsuit. In order to prevent disciplinary action from being implemented or recorded in the school record during the lawsuit period, an 'application for suspension of execution' must be filed in parallel with an administrative lawsuit. All irreparable damage that will occur due to the disposition and the impact on public welfare must be disclosed in detail, and the possibility of winning the claim on the merits must be fully explained in accordance with the recent Supreme Court decision 2025mu565. In the application for suspension of execution, He said, “Elaborate preparation equivalent to that of a lawsuit on the merits is required.” He continued, "School violence administrative litigation is a serious legal dispute with a clear burden of proof. If you want to cancel or reduce disciplinary action, you must exclude subjective emotional responses. Collection of evidence based on facts, consistent statements, and systematic response according to legal procedures are the only sure ways to protect the future of students."[View full article] Increasing number of administrative lawsuits against school violence, evidence should be used instead of emotion (link)