Press Coverage

The ISDS risk investigation team remains silent for 56 days due to differences of opinion between the ruling and opposition parties and out of session… Concerns about weakening negotiating power, burden of enforcement and gap… National Assembly Exit Strategy Dilemma As Coupang's American investors began International Investment Dispute (ISDS) procedures, the National Assembly's investigation into Coupang was placed in a fog from the beginning. As concerns grow that the political investigation could provide a pretext for international conflict during the 90-day cooling-off period, it is assessed that it has become unclear whether the government investigation will be launched in February. With both the enforcement of the investigation and the gap in response being pointed out as risks, how the National Assembly will design an exit strategy is emerging as a key task. According to the industry on the 23rd, Coupang's U.S. investment companies Greenox and Altimeter submitted a letter of intent for ISDS arbitration based on the Korea-U.S. Free Trade Agreement (FTA), claiming that they had suffered damages due to the Korean government's response following the Coupang personal information leak. ISDS is a system in which foreign investors seek a solution through international arbitration when they suffer losses due to the actions of the country in which they invested. The letter of intent to arbitrate is a preliminary procedure to inform the opposing government of the intention before filing formal arbitration. Following the submission of the letter of intention to arbitrate, the Korean government and U.S. investment companies are expected to enter into a 90-day cooling-off period of consultation, and the government investigation into Coupang is expected to virtually drift. The Democratic Party of Korea submitted a request for a government investigation to the National Assembly's Bill Division on December 31 last year, and the People Power Party submitted a request for a government investigation on the 8th. Due to the confrontation between the ruling and opposition parties over the leadership of the year-end and New Year's political situation and the internal circumstances of each party, an agreement on the agenda was in flux, and the report was made at the plenary session held on the 15th, 15 days after the Democratic Party's submission. The differences of opinion on the scope of the investigation were not narrowed, with the Democratic Party demanding an investigation focusing on Coupang, including information leaks and industrial accidents, and the People Power Party demanding an investigation into the overall personal information protection policy, including the three mobile communication companies and Temu and Ali. National Assembly blocked by external variables... With the National Assembly entering a non-session period ahead of the approval process for the plan that must confirm the scope of the investigation and witnesses due to concerns about counterattacks over 'retaliatory harassment', and external variables such as ISDS cooling-off period discussions overlapped, follow-up schedules, including the adoption of the government investigation plan, became difficult. Initially, it was expected that a full-scale investigation would be conducted after the opening of the extraordinary National Assembly in February, but as concerns over trade friction arose, some analysts say that the adoption of the plan itself has become uncertain. Experts point out that forcing a government investigation during the cooling-off period in the ISDS procedure could work at a disadvantage in the international arbitration arena. The cooling-off period is a time to seek an amicable agreement between the parties to the dispute, and if the level of pressure from the National Assembly increases during this period, there is a possibility that the investor side will take issue with this as a coercive measure. Dong-hoo Son, an American lawyer at SJKP, said, "During the cooling-off period, the government or the National Assembly pushing for an investigation or increasing pressure may be regarded as retaliatory harassment to force investors to submit. From the government's perspective, it has no choice but to face a dilemma between enforcing domestic law and preventing friction in trade, and may create an unfavorable situation for itself in an international trial. “It could lead to negative results,” he explained. Concerns about weakening the government’s negotiating power… 'Exit strategy' amid uncertainty As the confirmation of the official facts by the public-private joint investigation team was delayed, separate from the important government investigation, the government faced structural limitations in having to respond without the results of the domestic investigation or political agreement during the process of negotiation and explanation with American investment companies. Although 42 days have passed since the investigation team was officially launched on December 13 last year, there has still been no official announcement of investigation results. It has been 56 days since the incident occurred (November 29). It is pointed out that the situation in which the government has to respond to international disputes without clear confirmation of facts is weakening the government's negotiating power. Lee Jeong-hoon, professor of economics at Chung-Ang University, said, "The delay in the investigation team's announcement is a factor that amplifies market uncertainty," and predicted, "Investor anxiety arising from the absence of clear investigation results is likely to be passed on to the Korean government in future disputes." He continued, "If there is a situation where the investigation is delayed, efforts must be made to resolve uncertainty, such as clearly disclosing this." If the political foundation to support the legitimacy and transparency of the government's response is weakened, the risk may spread throughout the industry. This is because this dispute could increase uncertainty about overall cooperation in strategic industries between Korea and the United States, such as semiconductors and batteries. There are concerns that the gap in the National Assembly's response within the 90-day cooling-off period may go beyond the current issues and lead to a decline in external credibility and an increase in trade risks. Considering public opinion, it is not realistically easy to completely stop the National Assembly's response, so it is pointed out that the National Assembly must plan an exit strategy well. Professor Lee said, “Completely suspending the National Assembly’s functions just by filing for international arbitration is not in line with the legal sentiments of domestic victims and the public,” and suggested, “The National Assembly should continue its original role, including providing relief for damage, while maintaining a cool response that minimizes legal defects.” Reporter Go Hyeon-sol (sol@mt.co.kr)[View full article] International investment dispute ‘90-day cooling off period’… Coupang government investigation is in danger of being stranded (link)

“The most effective pressure” to delay taxation with retaliatory tariffs in France’s digital tax dispute… “A cool-headed diplomatic solution is needed.” Coupang’s U.S. investment company, venture capital (VC) Greenox and Altimeter, submitted a letter of intent to arbitrate an international investment dispute (ISDS) on the 22nd (local time) in opposition to the Korean government’s measures to regulate personal information leaks. They officially requested that the Office of the United States Trade Representative (USTR) investigate the Korean government and impose trade sanctions, including the imposition of tariffs. What U.S. investors presented as the basis for the USTR investigation is Article 301 of the Trade Act, so-called 'Super 301'. This is a legal means by which the United States can impose sanctions, such as retaliatory tariffs, on trading partners' unfair trade practices through presidential authority, and has been used as a core basis for major trade disputes in the past. Article 301 of the Trade Act was a major instrument of trade policy during the Trump administration. In 2018, the United States initiated a Section 301 investigation and imposed retaliatory tariffs on Chinese products due to China's infringement of intellectual property rights. This served as a means not only to resolve the U.S. trade deficit but also to demand system changes in other countries. In 2019, tariffs were imposed on aircraft and wine in the European Union (EU) due to subsidy payments to Airbus. The industry generally analyzes that this issue has a similar structure to the ‘French Digital Service Tax (DST) dispute’ in 2019. At the time, when France imposed taxes on American IT companies, USTR considered it an act of discrimination and opened an investigation. Afterwards, they announced the imposition of tariffs on French champagne, etc. and brought about a postponement of taxation. Coupang investment companies also define the Korean government's measures as 'discrimination against American companies', so the USTR's judgment in the future is drawing attention. Experts advise that we should keep in mind the possibility that this incident will spread beyond the individual Coupang issue and spread to Korea's major industries as a whole. Dong-hoo Son, an American lawyer at SJKP, said, “The essence of Article 301 is to find the most effective point of pressure to bring about policy changes in the other country’s government,” and analyzed, “It is a sufficiently realistic scenario for Korean semiconductors or automobiles to be placed on the retaliation list, as was the case in France.” He went on to say, "Article 301 has a strong tendency to be a political sword, and ISDS can be said to be a legal shield, but going through both procedures at the same time appears to be a diversionary operation." He added, "I am concerned that the risk of retaliation and astronomical compensation will act as a psychological and political binding force on policymakers." It is also pointed out that the structural specificity of Korea's data management system could become an issue in this dispute. Songcheon Moon, professor emeritus at KAIST Graduate School of Business, known as a world-renowned scholar on cyber DB security and the first national doctor of computer science, pointed out, “The U.S. claim is based on self-defense, and from their point of view, it is legal and reasonable.” Professor Moon advised, "The government will have to sufficiently prove that the weight and severity of damage from personal information leaks due to system differences between the two countries are different. The United States does not have a resident registration number, but Korea has a structure that has a lot of food for hackers due to the 'absolute ring' resident registration number." There are also voices calling for focusing on diplomatic solutions rather than overly interpreting the issue. Lee Jeong-hee, a professor of economics at Chung-Ang University, expressed caution, saying, "There has always been a trade controversy about foreign companies being disadvantaged, but in practical terms, there are not many cases where trade has become a major problem due to one specific company. It remains to be seen whether the U.S. government will actually take action." He emphasized, “We must continue to make people understand that we are not trying to diplomatically disadvantage a specific company, but rather hold them responsible for domestic damage.” Reporter Hwang Jeong-won (jwhwang@mt.co.kr)[View full article] France also suffered... The power of ‘Super 301 trillion’ summoned by Coupang (link)

Korean-Chinese companies enter the market and cooperate with investment advisory... Securing global market competitiveness beyond Asia - Daeryun “Daeryun, a model law firm with total legal services including AI technology, announced on the 23rd that it has signed an MOU (business agreement) with the Korean branch of Yingke Law Firm, China’s largest global law firm, and will strengthen legal support for Korean-Chinese companies and digital industry advice. At the signing ceremony held at Daeryun’s Seoul headquarters branch office on the 8th, Daeryun CEO Kuk-il Kim, attorney Kyung-won Yoon, and Jin-eol Jang attended the signing ceremony. Consultants and the representative attorney of Inker Law Firm's Korean office, LI In particular, it is recognized for its outstanding expertise in cutting-edge digital industries such as blockchain, AI (artificial intelligence), FinTech (fintech, financial technology), and semiconductor and energy trade. Through this MOU, Daeryun plans to provide integrated legal services to both Korean and Chinese companies seeking to expand into the two countries. We plan to cooperate in a variety of fields, including technology transfer advisory ▲international transaction and M&A legal advice ▲legal service cooperation in the semiconductor and energy trade fields. Lee Shin, representative attorney of Inker's Korea office, said, "By collaborating with Daeryun, a competent Korean law firm, we can provide more reliable Korean legal services to Chinese and Asian clients." Daeryun CEO Kim Kook-il said, "The partnership with Inker, which has a global network throughout China, will be a great help in expanding the scope of Daeryun's legal services throughout China and Asia. We will secure international competitiveness based on AI technology, online marketing, and Daeryun's own total legal service model." The system is continuously being expanded. Reporter Cheon Ju-young (young1997@mydaily.co.kr)[View full article] “Building a legal bridge between Korea and China”... Daeryun signs MOU with Chinese law firm Inker (Click here)

Daeryun Law Firm announced on the 23rd that it was selected as an excellent law firm in the field of trademark litigation at the 'Korea Law Firm Awards 2025' hosted by Asia Business Law Journal (ABLJ), a legal magazine in Asia. Every year, ABLJ, a leading legal media in the Asia-Pacific region headquartered in Hong Kong, conducts an in-depth survey of in-house lawyers, law firm lawyers, and legal experts around the world. It selects and announces excellent law firms that have achieved remarkable results in each field throughout the year. At this award, Daeryun was recognized for its expertise by winning in the trademark litigation category, which is the core of the intellectual property (IP) field. Daeryun has shown outstanding performance by securing excellent winning cases in the recently rapidly increasing number of trademark infringement disputes between companies and cases of violation of the Unfair Competition Prevention Act. As the background to its selection, ABLJ focused on the fact that Daeryun successfully led a difficult trademark dispute in which 'fair use by prior use' was an issue. ABLJ evaluated that “Daeryun reflected the prevailing practices of the market in legal principles and was recognized by the court for the business interests of previous users.” Daeryun Intellectual Property Group has formed a dedicated team led by IP field veterans such as Lee Da-woo, a former patent court judge, and Cho Min-woo, a patent attorney, to provide one-stop legal services ranging from trademark application and registration to trials and litigation. Based on this, we are evaluated as having successfully defended our clients' rights through strong legal action against the use of similar trademarks in industries where disputes are frequent, such as franchises and e-commerce. Daeryun CEO Kim Kuk-il said of the award, "This ABLJ award is the result of external recognition of the know-how and skills that Daeryun has steadily accumulated in the field of intellectual property rights," and added, "We will continue to do our best to provide the optimal legal solution for protecting intellectual property rights so that companies can focus on management with peace of mind." Eunhye Lee (zhses3@joseilbo.com)[View full article] Jose Ilbo - Daeryun, selected as an excellent law firm in the trademark litigation field at the ABLJ ‘2025 Korean Law Firm Awards’ (link) Roy Shu - Daeryun, selected as an excellent law firm in the trademark litigation field at the ABLJ ‘2025 Korean Law Firm Awards’ (Click here) Tax and Finance News - Daeryun, intellectual property rights litigation recognized by ABLJ... ‘2025 Korean Law Firm Awards’ Outstanding Law Firm (Go here) Sisa Journal - Daeryun Law Firm selected as an excellent law firm in the trademark litigation field at the ABLJ '2025 Korean Law Firm Awards' (Go here) KBC Gwangju Broadcasting - Daeryun, selected as an excellent law firm in the trademark litigation field at the ABLJ '2025 Korean Law Firm Awards' (Go here) Public News Agency - Daeryun Law Firm selected as an excellent law firm in the field of trademark litigation at the ABLJ ‘2025 Korean Law Firm Awards’ (Click here) Korea Economic Daily - Daeryun, selected as an excellent law firm in the trademark litigation field at the ABLJ ‘2025 Korean Law Firm Awards’ (Go here) Venture Square - Daeryun Law Firm selected by ABLJ for the 2025 Korean Law Firm Award in the Trademark Litigation Category (Click here) Money S - Daeryun, selected as an excellent law firm in trademark litigation at ABLJ's '2025 Korean Law Firm Awards' (Click here)

Now is the golden age of ‘Dujokku (Dubai chewy cookies)’. This dessert, which is a reinterpretation of Dubai chocolate and has a chewy texture by wrapping kadaif and pistachio in marshmallows, is gaining explosive popularity mainly on social media, causing a sell-out crisis. There has even been a strange phenomenon in which douchonku is made and sold not in cafes or bakeries, but in general restaurants such as sushi or soup restaurants that seem to have nothing to do with desserts. Recently, it is no exaggeration to say that the whole world is caught up in the doojokku craze, with young people holding open runs in front of blood donation centers after hearing that doojokku will be given to those who donate blood. In fact, if you look at second-hand trading platforms such as Carrot Market, you can see that the doojokku purchased at the store are being resold for a higher price or that there is a flood of purchase request posts saying, 'I'm looking for a doojokku.' Furthermore, many posts are found reselling ingredients needed to make dujokku, such as kadaif noodles and pistachios. It may have started with a light heart or to earn a small amount of pocket money, but the act of selling opened food in small pieces is not only prohibited by platforms such as Carrot due to concerns about hygiene, but also carries the risk of developing into legal problems. Food is a field directly related to the health and safety of the public, so legal regulations are very strict. First, according to Article 37, Paragraph 4 of the Food Sanitation Act, anyone who wishes to manufacture, process and sell food must report or register their business with the competent government office. Anyone who violates this and operates without reporting may be subject to imprisonment for up to 3 years or a fine of up to 30 million won in accordance with Article 97 of the same Act. There are also harsher punishment provisions. Article 4, Paragraph 7 of the Food Sanitation Act strictly prohibits the act of selling ‘products manufactured, processed, or distributed by persons other than business operators.’ If you violate this, you may be subject to severe punishment of up to 10 years in prison or a fine of up to 100 million won in accordance with Article 94 of the same Act. In other words, in principle, it is against the law to sell home-made dujoku without reporting the business or to arbitrarily divide and sell douchoku purchased at a store into small quantities. Of course, it is very rare for an individual to be immediately arrested and investigated for selling small quantities. If it is a first offense or the case is minor, administrative guidance or fines are often applied first. However, it should be noted that the surveillance network of investigative agencies has recently expanded beyond offline to online as well. The Ministry of Food and Drug Safety constantly monitors illegal advertisements online through its cyber investigation team. Carrot Market, a platform operator, is also aware of these risks and is taking crackdown measures through monitoring and prohibiting trade in food products directly processed and manufactured by individuals. In other words, even if someone does not report it, there is always the possibility of being caught up in the systematic surveillance and crackdown network. Therefore, if by chance you become the subject of an investigation by an investigative agency due to such a transaction, you should focus on proving that the act was unintentional and that business feasibility was significantly low rather than vaguely complaining of unfairness. In order to establish a violation of the Food Sanitation Act, there must be a business activity with the intention to continue and repeat, so it must be actively asserted that the number of sales was one-time or one-off or that there was virtually no actual profit. In addition, as an ordinary person, not a professional seller, you must explain with specific transaction details and circumstantial evidence that it was an accidental act due to legal grounds. Through this, efforts should be made to clear the charges at the investigation stage and prevent unfair punishment that may occur. ● Contributions by external writers may differ from the editorial direction of this paper. Gyeonggi Ilbo webmaster@kyeonggi.com[View full article] [Contribution] “We are dealing with Dujokku”… Can an inadvertent used transaction become a ‘crime’? (Shortcut)

Winter is a season when one small spark can easily spread into a large fire. The risk of indoor fires is particularly high during this period when the use of heating appliances increases rapidly. In the case of an indoor fire, special caution is required as the worst outcome can be loss of life and it can also lead to criminal punishment and huge civil compensation claims. The legal issue in fire accidents lies in the degree of intent and negligence. According to Article 164 of the Criminal Act (Arson of existing buildings), a person who intentionally sets fire to an existing building shall be punished by imprisonment for life or more than three years. On the other hand, the crime of accidentally starting a fire (Article 170 of the Criminal Act) is subject to a fine of less than 15 million won. The problem arises in ambiguous situations. Even if there was no definite intention, the court applies the crime of arson if “a fire was neglected while knowing that it could start.” Additionally, if a fire is caused by professional negligence or gross negligence (nearly intentional negligence), the person is subject to imprisonment for up to 3 years or a fine of up to 20 million won under Article 171 of the Criminal Act. In particular, if it is recognized as a misfire, not only is it subject to criminal punishment, but also liability for damages under Article 750 of the Civil Act cannot be reduced in compensation according to the special provisions of the Act on Liability for Misfire, and you may have to pay a huge amount of compensation. Therefore, it is most important to prove that it was not a ‘premeditated crime’ from the early stages of the investigation. Attorney Kim Jong-seo of Daeryun Law Firm recently took charge of the case of Mr. A, a client who almost became an arsonist due to a moment of mistake. Mr. A was booked on charges of attempted arson of a Hyeonju building by lighting an eco-bag at his home on fire with a lighter while intoxicated. The police strongly argued for indictment, saying that Mr. A had a ‘definite intention’ to set the fire based on the fact that he lit the fire himself using a lighter. Accordingly, a defense strategy was developed based on objective evidence. First, the fact that Mr. A voluntarily called 119 immediately after lighting the fire, legally argued that this constitutes an attempted surrender and arrest under the law. In addition, he suffered mental pain due to the death of a family member, and medical records proved that he was mentally and physically weak at the time of the incident. In addition, photos from the scene proved that the fire only caused some scorching of the eco bag and wallpaper and did not pose a public risk. As a result, the prosecution issued a suspended indictment conditional on completion of training to prevent recidivism, and the client was able to avoid the risk of becoming a criminal record and protect his life as a social worker. Attorney Kim Jong-seo of the Daeryun Law Firm said, "Immediately after a fire, there is no situation and there are many cases in which statements against oneself are made, but even a single statement can greatly change the level of punishment and the outcome of liability for compensation." He emphasized, “Only by establishing a response strategy that lowers the degree of negligence can we avoid the double whammy of criminal punishment and civil litigation.” Global Epic CP Lee Soo-hwan / lsh@globalepic.co.kr Winter fire accidents increase rapidly... There is only one slight difference between a ‘true story’ and an ‘arson’ (link)

KT and LGU+ also file an administrative lawsuit against the Personal Information Protection Commission's fine disposition. Security incidents also occur... Keeping a close eye on the court results. The battle between SK Telecom (hereinafter referred to as SKT) and the Personal Information Protection Commission over the 134.8 billion won fine has entered a new phase. This is because SKT disobeyed the fine imposed on the USIM information leakage hacking incident and filed an administrative lawsuit. This lawsuit, which is the first dispute since the launch of CEO Jeong Jae-heon's regime, is expected to have a significant impact not only on the standards for calculating fines but also on the personal information liability structure of the telecommunications industry as a whole, depending on the court's judgment. According to the industry on the 20th, SKT filed an administrative lawsuit on the 19th to appeal the fine imposed by the Personal Information Protection Commission in relation to the USIM information leakage hacking incident. SKT explained the background of the lawsuit, saying, “We would like to receive a thorough judgment from the court regarding the appropriateness of the fine.” SKT had customer SIM information stolen due to a hacker attack in April last year. As a result, 26.96 million pieces of core information including phone numbers and subscriber identification keys (IMSI) were leaked. The Personal Information Commission imposed a fine of 134.791 billion won and a fine of 9.6 million won for the incident in August last year. This is the largest fine since the launch of the Personal Information Commission. At the time, Personal Information Commissioner Ko Hak-soo pointed out, “There were overall security vulnerabilities, and even though we were aware of this for a long time, we missed the opportunity to take action.” The issue was ‘transience’… The issue of whether the principle of proportionality is violated is whether the fine is excessive compared to the violation. The industry believes that SKT will bring to the fore the violation of the principle of proportionality in fines. The principle of proportionality is the principle that means for achieving administrative purposes must have a reasonable proportional relationship with the purpose and that no more sanctions than necessary should be imposed. In accordance with the revised Personal Information Protection Act, the Personal Information Protection Commission calculated a fine of 3% based on total sales, not sales directly related to illegal activities. In response, SKT is expected to argue that sanctions based on total sales are a measure that excessively expands the scope of responsibility, considering the nature of the incident caused by an external attack such as hacking. “There is no large-scale investment or secondary damage.” Legal dispute In a case where personal information is leaked, the business operator may dispute legal responsibility over whether it has fulfilled its obligations to ensure safety under the Personal Information Protection Act. However, in this lawsuit, SKT is focusing on the appropriateness of the fine rather than completely denying the violation of the safety measure obligation itself. The court is also likely to base its judgment on the appropriateness of the level of sanctions rather than the illegality itself. Ji-woon Jang, an attorney at Daeryun Law Firm, said, “SKT will emphasize that the accident occurred even though it implemented the protective measures required by the technology level and industry practices at the time,” and added, “It is likely to mention that it made large-scale security investments and system improvements after the accident and that no secondary damage occurred.” “Considering that the fine is excessive, the key issue will be whether the level of sanctions is appropriate for the act of violating the law.” The ruling is expected to spread throughout the telecommunications industry. The ruling is not limited to SKT and is expected to have an impact on the entire telecommunications industry. Currently, KT is facing a fine from the Personal Information Commission after the public-private joint investigation team concludes. LG U+ is currently under police investigation on charges of obstruction of official duties surrounding the disposal of hacked servers. In these cases, the company's response after the accident can also be a major factor in determining legal responsibility. If SKT wins, all or part of the fine will be canceled. Naturally, the Personal Information Commission's method of calculating the overall sales standard is also put on hold. In particular, if a partial cancellation or reduction ruling is issued, a standard may be proposed that the standard for calculating fines in personal information infringement and hacking cases should be more strictly considered. Conversely, if SKT loses, the method of calculating fines based on total sales applied by the Personal Information Commission will be recognized as justified by the judiciary. This may lead to an interpretation that broadly holds companies responsible for managing personal information protection regardless of whether or not they suffered hacking damage. In addition, it is highly likely that the intensity of regulation on large-scale personal information processing businesses, including telecommunications companies, will be further increased. There are observations that with the expansion of security investments in telecommunications companies, it will become inevitable to revise management strategies to reflect potential regulatory risks. One telecommunications industry official said, “This ruling will serve as a standard for measuring the extent to which fines based on total sales are tolerated by the judiciary,” adding, “It is highly likely that it will remain as a precedent that determines the direction of the telecommunications industry and the domestic personal information sanctions system as a whole.”[View full article] SKT CEO Jeong Jae-hyun refuses to pay a fine of KRW 134.8 billion... "A 3% fine on sales is severe" (Shortcut)

The suspect denies the charge, saying, "B's unexpected behavior disrupted the class atmosphere." Claiming, "It is acknowledged that there was a point of inappropriateness, but it cannot be said that his mental health was impaired." An English teacher who cursed and administered corporal punishment to an academy student was cleared of charges. On the 8th, the Gwangju District Prosecutors' Office decided not to indict Mr. A, a man in his 30s who was sent on charges of child abuse and defamation. Mr. A was in the academy classroom in March last year. He was accused of abusing middle school student B, calling him a 'mentally ill person', swearing at him, and hitting his palm about 100 times with an empty plastic bottle. The academy, which recognized the abuse after Mr. A left the company, filed a complaint and the investigation began. Mr. A admitted the facts themselves, but denied intentionality of the abuse. He said, "B's academic attitude was insincere, such as suddenly joking or acting unexpectedly during class," and "B's mother disciplined him. The prosecution accepted Mr. A's claim. It was determined that it was difficult to say that the suspect's words and actions caused damage to the child's body or amounted to abuse equivalent to abandonment or neglect. The prosecution explained, "It is acknowledged that the suspect's words and actions were inappropriate, but there is insufficient evidence to show that the child's mental health was impaired as a result, such as receiving psychological treatment." In addition, regarding the charge of defamation, "The suspect's He added, “It is difficult to acknowledge the intentionality of the statement as it was only a one-off, and the content is closer to an expression of subjective opinion rather than lowering the social evaluation of the child victim, so it is difficult to say that it stated the facts.” Attorney Kang Jeong-hoon of Daeryun Law Firm, who represented Mr. A, said, “In order for emotional abuse of a child to be recognized, the level of harm to mental health and development must be recognized beyond simply an act that may cause discomfort,” adding, “While the client honestly acknowledges the facts, the act in question must be recognized as disciplinary action.” He explained, "We were able to obtain a good result by legally proving that this was the purpose."[View full article] “You are a mental patient…” Why is the English teacher who insulted a first-year middle school student not prosecuted for child abuse? (Shortcut)

Kim In-won, Head of Daeryun Law Firm's Criminal Investigation Group, As the police investigation into the illegal pornography distribution site 'AVMOV' has recently begun in earnest, awareness of digital sex crimes is growing. In particular, with the news that the police confiscated the server and launched a large-scale investigation, even simple viewers are trembling with fear as they do not know when the police will arrive. On the 20th, we had a phone interview with Kim In-won, head of the criminal group at Daeryun Law Firm, to hear about legal matters related to the distribution and viewing of pornography. Group leader Kim was appointed as a prosecutor at the Incheon District Prosecutors' Office and served as the chief prosecutor at the Seoul Central District Prosecutors' Office and the Seoul Northern District Prosecutors' Office, investigating sex crimes, special and financial cases for over 30 years. He joined Daeryun in May 2022. The following is a Q&A with Group Chairman Kim. - The N Room incident caused public outrage and punishment was strengthened. Nevertheless, why do digital sex crimes like AVMOV not disappear? “The biggest cause is blind faith in anonymity and distorted profit structure. Criminals have the mistaken belief that they are safe if they hide behind technical barriers such as bypassing overseas servers and paying with virtual currency. There is still a market structure that makes money by distributing provocative videos, and I think the fact that users can easily access it and the complacent perception that it is not a big crime are also contributing to maintaining the demand for crime.” - ‘If you pay with coins, a record is maintained. There are many people who believe that it will not be left behind. "Major domestic and international coin exchanges are obliged to provide subscriber information upon requests for cooperation from investigative agencies. Due to the nature of blockchain, fund flows are permanently recorded and tracked to the end. As soon as the operator's wallet address is identified, it is only a matter of time before the identity of all members who sent coins there is revealed." - If you claim that you watched it thinking it was a legal adult content and did not know it was a crime video. "It is difficult to clear the suspicion simply by subjectively stating that you did not know. For example, objective circumstantial evidence must be comprehensively considered, such as the path by which the site was accessed, whether the title or thumbnail of the video implied illegality, and the viewing time. If illegality is clearly revealed in the file name or thumbnail, scientific proof such as access log analysis is necessary to refute the illegality." - Punishment for downloading, possessing or redistributing illegal videos beyond viewing. The level of crime is: "Possession and storage are more serious crimes than viewing. This is because it carries the risk of being viewed again and distributed at any time. Furthermore, if you re-distribute it, you can be punished at almost the same level as the person who first distributed it. In particular, if you distribute child and adolescent sexual exploitation material, you can be sentenced to more than 3 years in prison, so it is highly likely that even a first-time offender will be sentenced to prison without probation." - Asking to upload a high-level video or mocking the victim. Will users who leave comments be subject to different punishments than those who simply watched? "Any act of encouraging a crime or ridiculing the victim through comments beyond simple viewing is accepted by investigative agencies and courts as strong evidence of active participation in a crime. Legally, a charge of aiding and abetting the spreader's crime may be applied, and if a specific video is requested, it may be interpreted as the domain of an educator or a co-principal. Additionally, if you continue to participate within the site through comments that specify and ridicule the victim, you may be subject to defamation or defamation under the Information and Communications Network Act. Additional charges of insult are applied under the Criminal Act, so it is highly likely that a much heavier sentence will be imposed than that of a simple viewer." Reporter Baek Jae-hyun (itbrian@newsis.com)[View full article] “We don’t use the ‘I didn’t know’ excuse… We need to change the complacent perception of digital sex crimes” (link)

Daeryun Law Firm announced on the 19th that it successfully completed a seminar on the theme of ‘Future Family Business Succession and Global Asset Management Strategy.’ This seminar, held at Daeryun Law Firm’s headquarters office in Park One, Yeouido, Seoul on the 16th, was held to examine rapidly changing inheritance law issues, such as the Constitutional Court’s recent unconstitutional decision regarding the reserve system and the so-called ‘Goo Hara Act’ that went into effect this month, and to present practical succession solutions to domestic and foreign asset owners and entrepreneurs. It was prepared. Sean Elgut, the founder and Washington DC representative of Veritas Collegiate Academy, a prestigious private school, and his wife, as well as global real estate and finance experts, showed great interest. The seminar consisted of four sessions in which legal, tax, accounting, and overseas legal experts participated. Chan-Woo Jeong, CEO of Daeryun Management, who took charge of the first session, analyzed practical changes resulting from the Constitutional Court's decision, such as the abolition of inheritance decentralization between siblings, under the theme of 'Korea's asset succession laws and precedent trends.' Representative Jeong emphasized, “As we live in an era where the wishes of the deceased are respected, elaborate preliminary planning that takes into account the red tape of wills and reasons for inheritance disqualification is essential.” In the following session, Dong-hoo Son, an attorney from New York, USA, presented on the topic of ‘American asset succession laws and cases.’ Attorney Son warned of the dangers of the difficult probate process that must be followed when holding assets in the United States. He presented asset management models that meet global standards, such as ‘Living Trust’ and ‘Establishment of LLC’, as key means to safely protect assets. In the last session, tax accountant Lee Joo-hee and accountant Park Soo-jin introduced professional tax saving strategies. Tax accountant Lee Joo-hee explained the risks of global asset taxation based on residency determination and measures to prevent double taxation. Accountant Park Soo-jin received a positive response by presenting a tax-saving simulation by share structure using the family business inheritance deduction and gift tax special taxation system with a maximum limit of KRW 60 billion. Kim Kuk-il, CEO of Daeryun Management, said, “This seminar was an opportunity to showcase Daeryun’s unique integrated solution encompassing domestic law, U.S. state law, and complex international taxation.” He added, “We will continue to utilize our global network to provide various opportunities to solve entrepreneurs’ complex asset succession concerns in one stop.” Reporter Jeong Cheol-wook[View full article] Seoul Shinmun - Daeryun Law Firm successfully concludes seminar on ‘Future Family Business Succession and Global Asset Management’ (Go here) Roishu - Daeryun Law Firm successfully completed seminar on ‘Future Family Business Succession and Global Asset Management’ (Click here)