Press Coverage

Rupture and Surgery After Accident···Civil Liability Dispute Over Alleged Negligence of Management and Supervision DutyCourt "Risk of Injury at a Level Participants Can Understand" A trainee who was injured during a one-day trial at a jiu-jitsu gym filed a claim for damages against the head of the gym, but it was dismissed.The Seoul Eastern District Court in April ruled against plaintiff A, a trainee, in a damages lawsuit for about 37 million won that A had filed against gym head B and others.A applied for a one-day jiu-jitsu trial at the gym operated by B in 2024. In the course of practicing with another trainee, A suffered an accident in which the knee and arm were bent, and underwent surgery. Afterward, A filed the lawsuit, claiming that B, as the gym head, had violated the duty of management and supervision to remove foreseeable risks and prevent accidents.However, B's side countered that before technique practice, they had instructed trainees to do warm-ups and other basic exercises, and had conducted safety education telling them not to brace with their hands but to use break-fall techniques when falling, thereby fulfilling the duty of care as an instructor.The court dismissed A's claim. The court panel ruled, "Sports such as jiu-jitsu inherently carry a risk of injury during a certain amount of physical contact or loss of balance, and it is common for trainees to participate on that premise," and "the mere fact that an injury occurred during practice cannot immediately be taken to mean that the gym head is recognized as having violated the duty of care." It added that the accident occurred in an instant, so it would have been difficult to prevent even if the gym head had been watching.Attorney Jang Hyun-ji of Daeryun LLC (law firm), who represented A, said, "Although we confirmed A's injury course, including the surgery, we actively defended against causation based on the fact that the gym had faithfully fulfilled safety duties such as prior break-fall education, and on past medical records," adding, "We were able to obtain recognition from the court of the social reasonableness of assuming the inherent risks that come with the nature of the sport." jckim99@sportsseoul.comReporter Kim Jong-cheol [Read the full article] Cruciate Ligament Rupture During a One-Day Jiu-Jitsu Trial···Court "Gym Head Not Liable for Compensation" (Go)

Siphoned Off 200 Million Won Over 2 Years and Misused Corporate Card···Strongly Pleaded "Business Facing Crisis of Survival"Court: "Long Period of Crime and Large Amount of Damage···Most of the Damage Not Recovered" A case has emerged in which a man who ran a company together with a business partner and siphoned off several hundred million won in company funds was sentenced to prison by the court.The Daegu District Court on the 12th of last month sentenced A, in his 40s, who had been indicted on charges of occupational embezzlement and occupational breach of trust, to one year in prison.A was accused of siphoning off, without authorization, about 200 million won in company funds that had been kept in the account of his business partner B, on some 50 occasions over two years starting in 2021. He was also accused of using the company's corporate card on some 200 occasions to pay about 9 million won for personal purposes during the same period.During the trial, B strongly urged the court to impose severe punishment, stating that A, who was in charge of accounting, had abused the trust between them to commit continuous embezzlement, and that as a result the company had been driven to a crisis of survival.In sentencing A to one year in prison, the Daegu District Court panel stated as its sentencing reasons, "The period of the defendant's crime is long and the amount of damage is large, so the culpability is very heavy," adding, "Nevertheless, we took into account the fact that most of the damage has not been recovered to date."Attorney Ahn Seung-jin of Daeryun LLC, who represented B in this trial, explained, "For occupational embezzlement and breach of trust to be established, there must be an intent of unlawful acquisition, whereby a person who keeps another's property or handles another's affairs breaches that duty to obtain private gain," adding, "It appears that the court, taking seriously the fact that A, as a business partner, abused deep trust to siphon off a large sum over a long period, and that the damage has not been recovered, imposed a prison sentence." [Read the full article] Said Let's Do Business Together, Then Siphoned Off Hundreds of Millions of Won in Company Funds: Business Partner Gets 'Prison Term' (Go)

Prosecution: "Could Not Recognize the Intent to Refuse"...Concludes "No Suspicion of Rape" Based on Polygraph and Other Evidence A man in his 20s who had been under investigation on charges of sexually assaulting a woman he came to know received a no-suspicion disposition from the prosecution. According to the legal community on the 10th, the Seoul Southern District Prosecutors' Office recently handed down a non-indictment disposition against Mr. A, who had been referred on rape charges, citing insufficient evidence and other grounds. Mr. A was accused of forcibly sexually assaulting Ms. B, a woman he came to know through social networking service (SNS) in 2024, in the course of having sexual relations. Ms. B claimed during the investigation that although she clearly expressed her intent to refuse, Mr. A ignored it and forced the sexual relations. On the other hand, Mr. A completely denied the charges, countering that it was a relationship by mutual consent. He also protested his innocence, saying that after the incident Ms. B continuously demanded settlement money. As a result of the investigation, the prosecution judged that, considering factors such as the victim shedding tears immediately after the incident and demanding that he leave, and the fact that Mr. A sent an apology message, there was a possibility that the victim had an intent to refuse. However, comprehensively considering factors such as Mr. A consistently stating during the investigation that he did not recognize the intent to refuse, and that no particular deceptive response was confirmed in the polygraph examination of either side, the prosecution found it difficult to recognize the charges. Also, on the basis of factors such as the victim not mentioning anything related to the incident even while talking on the phone with her boyfriend immediately after the incident, the prosecution judged that it was difficult to conclude that the victim was placed in a state in which she could not resist due to coercive assault or intimidation. Attorney Jo Yeong-gon of Daeryun LLC, who represented Mr. A, said, "Based on objective circumstances and evidence, we demonstrated that there was no coerciveness or criminal intent," adding, "In the course of the investigation, the facts were sufficiently confirmed, and a no-suspicion disposition was handed down." Reporter Gong Hye-rin heygong00@kyeonggi.com [Read Full Article] Victim Shed Tears, Apology Text Was Sent...Why the Prosecution Handed Down a "No-Suspicion" Disposition (Go to link)

Collaborating with "Napoli Shkolnik," rich in U.S. class action experience "We will secure the rights of Korean and U.S. victims" SJKP, the business-cooperation law firm of Daeryun LLC, announced on the 9th that in the large-scale personal information leak class action against Coupang filed with the U.S. District Court for the Eastern District of New York, it will join hands with "Napoli Shkolnik," a major U.S. law firm specializing in class actions, to take on the case together. Earlier, SJKP filed a lawsuit against Coupang, listed on the New York Stock Exchange (NYSE), and Coupang Chairman Kim Bom, to provide relief for the large-scale personal information leak damage suffered by Coupang users in both Korea and the U.S. In response, the Coupang side retained Kirkland & Ellis, one of the world's top-tier mega law firms, signaling a fierce defensive battle. In response, SJKP decided to establish a strong joint response system with Napoli Shkolnik to secure the decisive evidence that will determine the outcome of the trial and to maximize the possibility of an ultimate victory. Napoli Shkolnik is a major law firm with overwhelming in-house discovery capabilities and abundant experience in the fields of U.S. federal class actions and data and privacy infringement litigation, so it is expected to create great synergy in matters such as proving damages. Taking this joint response as a starting point, the two firms will move as one team to seamlessly support victims in both Korea and the U.S. First, SJKP, together with Korea's Daeryun LLC, will take exclusive charge of the front line of domestic legal support, including representation of domestic victims, communication, lawsuit intake, and coordination of the case between Korea and the U.S. In addition, Napoli Shkolnik will conduct the local U.S. litigation, spearheading the overall conduct of the lawsuit, including the discovery procedure, and forming a united cooperation. The dedicated legal team that will lead the case is also composed of experts specialized in this class action. On the SJKP side, joining are Attorney James Manny, a New York (U.S.) attorney who has successfully led complex litigation for multinational corporations in federal and state courts for over 20 years; foreign attorney Richard Won (U.S.), who has demonstrated outstanding capabilities in large-scale cross-border corporate disputes and international arbitration while moving between Korea and the U.S.; and foreign attorney Son Dong-hu (U.S.), who has handled corporate and securities law at numerous law firms in New York and provided various solutions. On the Napoli Shkolnik side, representative attorney Hunter Shkolnik, who has overseen discovery and trial teams in various large-scale class actions in the U.S., will form a dedicated attorney team and take the lead, and Attorney Jung Jun-ho, who has led the protection of the legal rights and interests of the Korean community based on his experience as chief legal officer (CLO) of a Nasdaq-listed company and in large-scale tort litigation, will participate to maximize synergy. To date, about 7,800 people are participating in this U.S. lawsuit, and going forward, one can additionally join the lawsuit through the websites of Daeryun LLC and SJKP. SJKP foreign attorney Son Dong-hu said, "If damage from personal information infringement occurs across borders, the legal response to it also needs to be carried out systematically through cross-national collaboration," adding, "Through the joint response system with Napoli Shkolnik, SJKP will do its utmost to the end so that the voices of victims in both Korea and the U.S. are faithfully reflected in the U.S. federal litigation procedure and they can recover their rightful rights." Reporter Kim Jin-ryong (kim.jinryong@mk.co.kr) [Read Full Article] Maeil Business - Daeryun-SJKP Join Hands with a U.S. Law Firm to Take On Coupang Together..."Winning with Our Own Discovery" (Go to link) Edaily - Daeryun-SJKP Jointly Respond to the "Coupang Personal Information Leak Lawsuit" with a U.S. Law Firm..."Winning with Discovery" (Go to link)

Charged with forcibly sexually assaulting and indecently assaulting an employee against her will Court: "In the CCTV, claims often conflict with statements...lacks consistency" A man in his 50s who was put on trial on charges of attempting to sexually assault an employee at a bar and forcibly molesting her was found not guilty in the appeal as well as in the first trial. The Seoul High Court, in the appellate hearing of the case of Mr. A, indicted on charges of attempted rape and indecent assault by force, dismissed the prosecution's appeal and upheld the lower court ruling that found him not guilty. Mr. A was charged with, in August 2024, attempting to forcibly sexually assault employee Ms. B against her will at a bar in Paju, stopping at an attempt, and then indecently assaulting Ms. B in the course of a dispute over the bill. The complainant Ms. B and other employees stated that Mr. A forcibly attempted coercive physical contact, and the prosecution indicted Mr. A on this basis. On the other hand, Mr. A's side completely denied the charges. He argued that the physical contact that occurred at the time was an act by mutual consent, and that afterward, when Ms. B excessively demanded an additional tip and a dispute broke out, she filed a false report out of spite. The first-instance court found Mr. A not guilty. The court determined that the statements of Ms. B and other employees who witnessed the incident, which supported the charges, frequently conflicted and lacked consistency, making it difficult to believe their credibility as they were. The court said, "According to the CCTV, immediately after the point at which she claimed the sexual assault damage occurred, Ms. B exhibited behavior such as sharing an embrace with Mr. A outside the room," adding, "The employee's claim that she heard a scream from outside and hurriedly opened the door also conflicted with her appearance in the CCTV, in which she was calmly looking at her mobile phone at the time." The prosecution, dissatisfied with the first instance, appealed on the ground of a factual error. However, the appellate court also upheld the not-guilty ruling, finding no reasonable circumstances to view the lower court's judgment as unjust. The appellate court ruled, "It cannot be said that the lower court's judgment of the evidentiary value is clearly wrong, or that the reasoning leading to the finding of fact runs contrary to logic and the rules of experience." Attorney Kim Eun-yeong of Daeryun LLC, who defended Mr. A's case, explained, "It was a serious sex crime charge, but from the early investigation stage we meticulously analyzed the objective CCTV footage and the contradictions in the statements of the complainant and witnesses, and dug into the flaws in the claims," adding, "By clearly proving the motive for the false report and impeaching the credibility of the statements, we were able to clear the injustice and preserve the not-guilty verdict in the appeal as well." jckim99@sportsseoul.com Reporter Kim Jong-cheol [Read Full Article] Man Charged with Sexually Assaulting a Bar Employee Found "Not Guilty" in Appeal as Well as First Trial (Go to link)

When the early summer heat begins, conflicts over air conditioner water leaks start to arise in studio apartments, villas, apartments, and the like. This is because a breakdown is belatedly discovered when an air conditioner left unused all winter is operated after a long time, or a water leak from the device causes secondary damage affecting the unit below. The problem is that the parties keep passing the buck over responsibility for repair costs or wallpapering costs, ultimately escalating into a mudslinging fight. Therefore, when such a problem arises, it is more important than anything to grasp clear legal criteria and respond strategically from the early stage. When damage occurs due to an air conditioner leak, the target of a damages claim varies depending on the cause of the leak. The most common conflict is the dispute over responsibility between landlord and tenant. Under Article 623 of our Civil Act, the landlord bears the obligation to maintain the condition necessary for the lessee to use and profit from the object in accordance with the terms of the contract (the repair obligation). On this basis, precedent holds that if it is not a minor problem that the lessee can easily fix without any particular cost, but damage of a degree that makes use and profit for the purpose of the contract impossible unless repaired, then the landlord has the repair obligation. By this criterion, in the case of an air conditioner, when an essential problem arises in its function itself—such as the failure of core parts like the compressor or main board, or a refrigerant gas leak due to aged piping—this constitutes a large-scale repair, and the landlord bears the repair responsibility. This is because an air conditioner constitutes basic equipment of modern residential life. On the other hand, simple maintenance or replacement of consumables—such as replacing remote control batteries, cleaning filters, or simply charging refrigerant gas—is regarded as a small-scale repair, and it is generally borne by the lessee. Also, if the tenant arbitrarily changes the drainage hose or fails to empty the condensate tank in time, causing the water to overflow, this constitutes the lessee's negligence in management (violation of the duty of care of a good manager), so the liability for damages falls on the lessee. However, not all leak liability is confined solely to between the landlord and tenant. If, in an apartment or the like, the cause is not an individual household's problem but rather that the common drainpipe through which the air conditioner discharge water of multiple households flows is clogged with foreign substances, causing the water to back up into a unit, then in this case a damages claim must be filed against the residents' representative meeting or the management office, which bears the management responsibility for the common areas. Legal response against the construction company must also be examined in the case of a new building. In an apartment or officetel built only a short time ago, a leak may occur due to a structural defect in the embedded piping of a system air conditioner or defective waterproofing work. Since this is not the fault of the tenant or others but defective construction, one must directly demand defect repair from the seller and construction company and claim compensation for the secondary damage. So how should a tenant suffering in the immediate heat respond? Rather than recklessly repairing it with one's own money first, one must clearly notify the responsible party (mainly the landlord)—via content-certified mail and the like—of the fact that repair is needed, together with photos and videos of the broken area. If the landlord does not carry out the repair within a considerable period even after notification, the lessee may first repair it at their own expense and then claim the cost from the landlord. This is a claim for costs due to the landlord's non-performance of the repair obligation, and precedent sometimes recognizes it as a claim for reimbursement of necessary expenses. If the landlord ultimately does not pay the cost, the lessee may refuse to pay rent in proportion to the loss incurred from being unable to use the air conditioner until the repair is done, and may assert that the repair-cost claim be deducted from the deposit to be returned when the lease contract terminates. Attorney Shin Hye-jin of Daeryun LLC said, "Conversely, from the landlord's standpoint, if you face a situation where a tenant unilaterally calls in an expensive private company and then claims excessive repair costs or deducts them from the rent, you do not need to accept this unconditionally. In this case, you should request an objective opinion on the cause of the breakdown from a leak-detection company or repair technician, and examine whether the type of defect constitutes a large-scale repair, or whether it is a violation of the tenant's duty of care or a common-pipe defect," adding, "If the tenant's negligence is clear or it constitutes a small-scale repair yet the tenant unilaterally fails to pay rent, when the arrears reach two months' worth you can lawfully notify termination of the lease contract under Article 640 of the Civil Act and deduct the damage cost and overdue rent from the deposit." Early summer air conditioner leak disputes, coupled with the discomfort index, easily escalate into emotional fights, such as hurling abusive language at each other. Rather than recklessly avoiding contact or withholding rent and confronting each other emotionally, it is more important than anything to objectively grasp the cause of the breakdown. Afterward, receiving the assistance of a legal expert and taking systematic procedures such as sending content-certified mail can be a wise way to protect each party's property and rights. Enet News Reporter Park Jeong-woo (woo@enetnews.co.kr) [Read Full Article] Air Conditioner Breakdown and Water Leak Disputes: Who Bears the Liability, "Landlord vs. Tenant"? (Go to link)

A transport company CEO, after resigning, filed a hundred-million-won lawsuit against his former workplace but lost at the appellate level following his loss at the first instance. He demanded a guarantee of retirement age and severance pay, claiming that he had returned as a rank-and-file employee after resigning, but the court did not accept it. According to the legal community on the 8th, the Changwon Division of the Busan High Court in April dismissed the plaintiff's appeal in the appellate proceedings of a lawsuit for confirmation of invalidity of dismissal and claims for wages, etc., filed by Mr. B, the former CEO of transport company A, against the company. Mr. B joined Company A in the early 2000s and worked there before serving as CEO from 2016. He submitted a resignation letter in 2021, and the company notified Mr. B of a dismissal disposition. However, Mr. B argued that the dismissal was invalid because, immediately after resigning as CEO, he returned as an ordinary worker and performed duties such as vehicle dispatch. Mr. B also argued that the company should pay 260 million won in compensation. According to the collective agreement concluded between Company A and the labor union in 2017, the retirement age is 60, and thereafter, the right to be re-employed as a contract worker and remain employed until age 65 is guaranteed. On this basis, Mr. B claimed wages premised on contract-worker employment, and severance pay for the period from his time as a rank-and-file employee through his tenure as CEO. However, the court found that there was no evidence to view that Mr. B had newly concluded an employment contract with the company after resigning as CEO, and did not accept his claim that the dismissal disposition was invalid. Although Mr. B submitted, as evidence of employment, a vehicle-dispatch status document printed with his name, the court found that since this document bore no seal, it could not serve as material to recognize the fact of actual work. The court also did not accept the severance pay claim for the period of his tenure as CEO. Under the Commercial Act and Company A's articles of incorporation, a director's severance pay is determined by a resolution of the general meeting of shareholders, but there was no evidence to recognize that a general meeting of shareholders was held to determine Mr. B's severance pay. The court judged that Mr. B's right to claim severance pay for his time as a rank-and-file employee arose in 2016 when he took office as CEO, and had extinguished as more than the 3-year statute of limitations had passed. Attorney Jo Ik-cheon of Daeryun LLC, who represented Company A, said, "Mr. B was an employer who exercised substantive management rights, yet after resigning he selectively asserted only the advantageous status of a worker," adding, "By meticulously applying the principle of executive severance pay payment under the Commercial Act, the criteria for judging worker status, and the legal principles of the statute of limitations, we were able to draw out a good result." Reporter Jeong Cheol-wook [Read Full Article] "I Returned as a Rank-and-File Employee After Resigning"...Former Transport Company CEO Who Filed Hundred-Million-Won Wage and Severance Suit Loses Appeal (Go to link)

-Legal Column by Attorney Kim Won-sang, Daeryun LLC (Limited) For companies undergoing corporate rehabilitation proceedings, the most brutal time is, paradoxically, after the rehabilitation plan is approved. This is because approval is not the finish line of rehabilitation, but the start of a long tunnel of court supervision and credit constraints lasting several years. In the case of a steel toll-processing company I recently handled, it took 8 months from the commencement decision to approval, and then just 3 months after approval, we were able to draw out an early termination. This shows what kind of legal strategy is needed to use the rehabilitation process not as a mere debt forgiveness but as a substantive means of returning to the market. The first watershed in the rehabilitation of small and mid-sized manufacturers is the superiority between the "going-concern value" and the "liquidation value" calculated by the investigating commissioner. In the above case, the gap between the two values was only about 280 million won, so there was a risk of facing liquidation pressure at any time depending on the sales trend. Accordingly, at the due diligence stage, beyond simple accounting estimates, we proved, with objective data, self-rescue efforts such as a confirmation of maintained transactions with major sales outlets and the relocation of the factory. This response was positively reflected in the going-concern value assessment and became a decisive factor in securing trust by presenting creditors with a higher recovery possibility compared to liquidation. The fate of management is also a key variable determining business continuity. Article 205, Paragraph 4 of the Debtor Rehabilitation Act provides for the retirement of shares and capital reduction when insolvency arises through the responsibility of management. However, in the above case, we closely demonstrated that the crisis in question originated from exogenous shocks such as the prime contractor's bidding delays. As a result, we defended management rights through a 2:1 share consolidation—an exceptionally lenient level in practice—and, by specifying the retention of the current management, were able to fully preserve the company's core assets: its technical know-how and prime contractor network. The "early termination" confirmed just 3 months after approval is the final fruit of such legal design. A considerable number of companies rest content with the approval decision, but to quickly escape the court's supervision, an early termination based on Article 283 of the Debtor Rehabilitation Act is essential. In the above case, we designed the cash flow structure by working backward from the rehabilitation plan stage so that initial repayment resources could be secured immediately right after approval. Behind the court's short-term conviction that "there is no impediment to carrying out the rehabilitation plan" was an objective repayment-performance capability prepared with termination as the goal from the beginning of the application. Ultimately, the rehabilitation of small and mid-sized manufacturers, unlike that of large corporations, is essentially about preserving management's business expertise and a swift return to the market. Rehabilitation should be used not merely as a procedure for adjusting debt, but as an advanced legal compliance means for improving the company's constitution and re-entering the market. The external audit costs and constraints on fund operation that continue for several years after approval can be resolved early through such a sophisticated exit strategy aimed at early termination. Management considering rehabilitation must, from the beginning of the application, undertake meticulous legal review with the possibility of early termination after approval in mind. The assistance of an expert who can precisely weave the particularities of the individual business site into the rehabilitation plan and draw out the court's recognition is essential. This is because only a strategy properly designed from the start is the most realistic measure to shorten the distance between approval and termination and put the company back on a fully normal track. Reporter Lee Dong-oh (canon35@mt.co.kr) [Read Full Article] Early Termination Just 3 Months After Approval...The Finish Line of SME Rehabilitation Is Not "Approval" but "Return" (Go to link)

Points out the gap between the public-education-centered accreditation system and educational demand "Institutional mechanisms to accommodate educational diversity must be prepared" Amid the Ministry of Education and municipal and provincial offices of education recently announcing policies to strengthen management, such as special inspections and complaint measures against unauthorized educational facilities, an opinion has been raised that the problem is difficult to solve through a crackdown- and punishment-centered approach alone. Attorney Kang Dong-hoon of Daeryun LLC noted on the 8th that the issue of unauthorized educational facilities should be viewed not as a simple legal violation but from the aspect of the gap between changing educational demand and the current legal system. Attorney Kang diagnosed that although diverse educational demands such as overseas advancement and immersive foreign language education are increasing, the current education legal system still maintains a public-education-centered accreditation system. Accordingly, he said, a structure has formed in which educational models different from the existing school system find it difficult to be incorporated into the institutional framework. The current Elementary and Secondary Education Act recognizes something as a school only when it meets the curriculum, facility standards, and teacher qualifications set by the state. For this reason, even if a facility is registered and operated as a private academy, if its actual mode of operation is similar to a school, it may be judged as the establishment of an unauthorized school. Attorney Kang explained, "The Supreme Court maintains the position of regarding a case as having the substance of a school and punishing it when it accommodates students for a certain period and operates on a grade system, or conducts a systematic curriculum, life guidance, grade management, and the like." However, he assessed that the current system carries the limitation of, rather than embracing diverse alternative education models within the institutional framework, effectively defining educational forms that do not fit the existing school system as unlawful. He also cited as a problem that although the government operates an alternative school accreditation system, the financial requirements and the obligation to organize a domestic curriculum are strict, so facilities pursuing specialized international education or alternative education find it difficult to legally enter the institutional framework. Attorney Kang mentioned that such a discussion also needs to be examined from the aspect of guaranteeing constitutional basic rights. He explained, "The Constitutional Court and the Supreme Court recognize parents' right to educate their children and the right to choose a school as constitutional basic rights, and the autonomy and professionalism of education are also guaranteed by the Constitution." He continued, "The act of choosing specialized education that public education cannot provide can also be understood as an extension of the exercise of basic rights," analyzing, "Criminally punishing all attempts at alternative education solely on the ground that they did not go through the administrative accreditation procedure could lead to controversy over a violation of the principle against excessive restriction." He also diagnosed that the phenomenon of increasing unauthorized educational facilities needs to be seen not as a simple illegal-operation issue but as a result reflecting educational demand that public education has failed to satisfy. Attorney Kang said, "The selection criteria and advancement paths of education consumers have already diversified, but the system does not sufficiently reflect this," adding, "A punishment-centered approach alone makes it difficult to fundamentally resolve realistic educational demand." He explained, "Excessive regulation can induce the covert operation of educational facilities and, on the contrary, negatively affect the protection of learners' rights and interests," adding, "Institutional improvement should be made in a direction that broadly guarantees the autonomy of the curriculum while managing and supervising it under minimum legal standards." He further held that, to protect both the diversity and the public nature of the educational field together, legal and institutional reform focused on the substantive guarantee of learners' rights, rather than on control, is needed. Reporter Jeong Ye-jin yejin0311@inews24.com [Read Full Article] [Legal Spotlight]➂ Crackdown on Unauthorized Educational Facilities Strengthened..."Institutional Improvement Is Needed More Than Punishment" (Go to link)

Ex-lover filed a complaint by splicing together only the favorable parts of the conversation...Defended by restoring the omitted messages A man in his 40s who had been under investigation on suspicion of assaulting his ex-lover and forcing her to write a written statement cleared his name by restoring deleted text messages. Upon checking the entire content of the conversation, it turned out to be the other party's one-sided claim. According to the legal community on the 4th, the Seoul Seocho Police Station made a decision of non-referral on April 2 regarding Mr. A, who had been investigated on charges of violating the Act on the Aggravated Punishment of Specific Crimes (assault of a driver, etc.), coercion, and intimidation. A non-referral is a disposition in which the police, after completing the investigation, determine that no crime was committed and end the case without referring it to the prosecution. Mr. A was suspected of engaging in threatening behavior toward his ex-lover while she was driving in 2023 and of coercing her into preparing a notarized deed during a dispute over money. Mr. A argued that he had rightfully demanded the return of money he had lent, and that some of the conversation content had been edited differently from the actual situation before being submitted. The police determined that, apart from the complainant's claims, there was insufficient objective evidence to prove the assault of a driver. His statement that, while arguing during driving, he momentarily grabbed the steering wheel to prevent an accident when the other party was not looking ahead properly, was also accepted. As for the coercion charge, he also received a no-suspicion disposition, as circumstances were found in other messages that the complainant had hidden, showing that the two had normally settled money and discussed an agreement. Attorney Lee Tae-seung of Daeryun LLC, who represented Mr. A, said, "It was a case where multiple charges were filed all at once as the conflict between the lovers deepened," adding, "Through digital forensics, we restored omitted content such as emails and text messages and proved the actual flow of the conversation." Attorney Lee continued, "By specifically presenting materials contradicting the other party's statements, we were able to clear all charges." Reporter Hwang Jeong-won (garden@sidae.com) [Read Full Article] Nearly Fell Victim to "Devil's Editing"...False Charge of "Assaulting an Ex-Lover," Saved by Restoring the Conversation Log (Go to link)