Press Coverage

At one time, the bar exam was a representative ‘admission gate’ in our society. This is because, without any special background, he was able to enter the legal profession based solely on his skills. This system was not perfect, but at least there was a time when it made the saying, “Risks fly in the face” a reality. It has already been 17 years since the law school system was introduced. At the time, this system was launched with the goal of resolving the problem of ‘failure to pass the civil service examination’ and training legal professionals with practical skills and diversity. The author is also one of those who positively evaluated the abolition of the bar exam. This is because they were clearly aware of the problems with the unrealistic exam environment and inefficient talent selection methods, and they also recognized the need for system reform. However, as time passes, a deep gap is widening between the ideals of the system and the reality. On the surface, law school appears to be a system open to anyone, but in reality, the starting line is different. As of 2025, more than 80% of accepted students at 22 of the 25 law schools nationwide are from universities in the metropolitan area, and more than half are from so-called SKY universities. Only 5% of students graduated from local universities. This is where the gap between formal openness and practical entry barriers is clearly revealed. Furthermore, law schools are gradually losing their original purpose of ‘cultivating professional lawyers with diverse backgrounds and experiences.’ Education is gradually degenerating into an ‘academy-type structure’ aimed only at passing the bar exam, and practice-oriented or convergence-type education has virtually been pushed to the back burner. Some students are attempting to transfer to law schools in the metropolitan area or taking repeated leave of absence to increase their passing rates, and the number of cases of preparing for the exam at private academies is also increasing. As a result, the law school system is becoming more and more ‘publicized,’ and is actually returning to a structure that repeats the ills of the past bar exam. This institutional distortion, combined with the structural limitations of the legal market, is creating bigger problems. The legal market is unable to expand, and as the number of legal professionals with uniform backgrounds and ways of thinking increases, a closed structure in which they compete for limited opportunities is becoming entrenched. This not only hinders the diversity and creativity of the legal profession, but also has a negative impact on the quality and accessibility of legal services provided to the public. Of course, it cannot be said that the bar exam was an ideal system. Long-term exams and excessive competition have caused many social and personal side effects. However, the bar exam was an open structure in which anyone could take the challenge, and it also opened the door to certain opportunities for those from non-metropolitan areas or from non-literary universities. If the current law school system is not even able to replace it, it is a plan worth considering again to discuss the revival of the bar exam or the comprehensive expansion of the preliminary exam. However, in the end, what is important is not the superiority or inferiority of the systems. The question that really needs to be asked is this. “Is the current system actually open to talented young people?” The system should not be an end in itself, but a means to protect the values ​​and ideals it was intended to realize. Law schools cannot be an exception. Now that the presidential election has begun, if the political world talks about youth, fairness, and the restoration of class mobility, the legal training system must also be discussed in a public forum beyond political factions. This is not just a matter of fighting over the existence of the examination system, but a fundamental question of how far Korean society can actually guarantee equality of opportunity. I hope that the promise of change starting from the legal profession will once again give more people hope that “dragons can fly from the beginning.”[View full article] Law Leader - [Contribution] Purpose of introduction: Fading law school, legal training system needs to be completely reformed (link) Korea Law Daily - [Contribution] Purpose of introduction: Fading law school, legal training system needs to be completely reformed (link)

Group litigation law firm sends a proposal to the National Assembly. Requests for 'opt-out' of judgment applied to all victims "Realize group rights by improving group litigation system" While 235 users harmed by SK Telecom (SKT) SIM information hacking are filing a lawsuit against SKT for damages, victims are raising their voices calling for the introduction of an 'American-style class action' system where the effect of the judgment applies to all victims instead of the current group lawsuit system. According to the legal community on the 29th, the victims of the SKT group lawsuit and Daeryun Law Firm, their litigation representative, plan to send a legislative proposal to this effect to the National Assembly Legislative and Judiciary Committee and the Science, Technology and Communications Committee on the 30th. They plan to request additional cases as part of their presidential election pledge. The American-style class action lawsuit they are requesting stipulates that when multiple consumers or investors suffer a small amount of damage due to the same or similar causes, the effect of the judgment applies to all victims. A representative files a lawsuit collectively on behalf of all victims. It can be widely used in various fields such as the environment, pollution, consumer damage, and securities trading. The advantages of American-style class action lawsuits include △effective relief of small and large amounts of damage, △increased deterrence for companies and the possibility of recovering damage, and △an 'opt-out method' that receives the effect of the judgment without separate active consent. If any victim files a lawsuit for the benefit of the group and wins, the opt-out is applied unless a separate exclusion request is made. In fact, after the 2021 T-Mobile hacking incident in the U.S., in which 76.6 million customer information, including social security numbers and driver's license information, was leaked, a lawsuit was filed and a settlement of $500 million (approximately KRW 655 billion) was paid. Compensation of up to $2,500 (approximately 3.28 million won) was awarded per individual. On the other hand, among our group lawsuits, consumer group lawsuits stipulate that consumer groups that meet certain requirements can request the prohibition or suspension of illegal acts by business operators that infringe on the rights and interests of many consumers. However, this has the limitation of not being able to claim monetary damages. In addition, unlike the United States, our group lawsuit is a joint lawsuit. Victims must directly participate in the lawsuit to receive compensation. It does not result in punitive damages or automatic full victim relief. They argue that due to these institutional limitations, the actual scale of compensation and social impact of the SKT group lawsuit is bound to be significantly limited compared to the United States. A Daeryun official expressed concern, saying, "American-style class action lawsuits are effective in realizing the rights of the entire group as they can protect passive victims, but due to the limitations of our system, the actual amount of compensation and corporate liability is still lower than in the United States." He added, "We are supplementing the existing consumer group lawsuit system and preparing an opt-out method and anti-abuse prevention device, etc. He urged, “Legislation must be enacted that accepts its merits.” Reporter Yeji Kim (yesji@fnnews.com)[View full article] [Exclusive] 'SKT hacking' class action lawsuit "Requests for an American-style presidential election pledge" (link)

Interview with Cho Young-gon and Yeo Sang-won, representative lawyers of Daeryun Law Firm's Special Department, “An unprecedented hacking incident in history... SKT is proving responsible for intentional and negligent actions and achieving justice.” Emphasized, “No matter what criticism or pressure, we will fulfill our duty as a large law firm on the side of the people.” A month has passed since the unprecedented server hacking incident occurred, but public anger against SK Telecom (SKT) is not going away. This is because the SIM information of approximately 23 million subscribers has been leaked, but no significant countermeasures have been taken. Daeryun Law Firm has initiated criminal charges and accusation procedures to punish those responsible, and is providing practical legal assistance to subscribers who have suffered damage. On the 27th, a civil suit was filed with the Seoul Central District Court seeking compensation of 1 million won per person. Daeryun said the Special Action Headquarters (Special Department) has been handling the case since the beginning of the incident. The Special Department is an organization that organizes professional lawyers under the leadership of the head of the division and specializes in mid- to large-scale cases, and legal veterans with nearly 40 years of experience in the legal field handle cases at the forefront. Cho Young-gon, a former chief of the Seoul Central District Prosecutors' Office and head of the Special Division 2, who is overseeing this litigation, said, "Daeryun is the only large law firm among large law firms that is speaking out and carrying out a class action lawsuit regarding the SKT incident." “Most large law firms are dealing with corporations as clients, so they are showing a passive attitude toward this issue. Even though the damage to the public is clear, they are ignoring the damage, which is extremely irresponsible behavior,” he said. In fact, large law firms are reluctant to get involved with this situation. This is because SK Group, the second-highest ranking company in the business world, could be looked down on for representing the victims. Large law firms have corporations as their main clients, so they are reluctant to take on sensitive lawsuits. Even within the legal community, there is much skepticism about the possibility of winning class action lawsuits. SKT's negligence and causality must be proven, but some say it is not easy to collect technical evidence for secondary damage. Special Department 1 Chief Attorney Yeo Sang-won (Training Institute 17th Class) said, "There is a lot of pressure, such as the fact that it is a lawsuit where you can only receive a few hundred thousand won at most, and that you will definitely lose," but added, "However, this lawsuit goes beyond simply redressing individual rights, and can be said to be a public interest lawsuit to protect the people's right to personal information." emphasized. He said, “The reason we stand against the perception that accusations and lawsuits are like hitting a rock with an egg is to put the brakes on a structure in which citizens’ rights are treated more lightly than corporate profits.” Regarding the amount of alimony, we compared and analyzed it with existing similar cases. Attorney Yeo said, "In personal information leakage cases such as those in banks, the court has generally recognized compensation in the range of 100,000 to 300,000 won. However, this case occurred because the telecommunication service provider failed to safely manage SIM card information in the current situation where mobile phones are used as a means of identity authentication. Therefore, we have decided to hold liability more strictly than in past cases and proceed with the lawsuit by setting the compensation amount at 1 million won per person." He continued, "Because the accident occurred within the scope of the other party's control. He emphasized, "As long as it is difficult to prove that SKT is not at fault, we expect the trial's conclusion to be favorable to our side." In the case of criminal punishment, it was difficult to make specific predictions as the level may vary depending on the police investigation and the Personal Information Protection Committee's investigation. Attorney Cho Young-gon said, “We requested a strict investigation from the public interest perspective regarding SKT’s intentional cost reduction of overall information protection measures and poor response in the reporting process to the Korea Internet & Security Agency.” He added, “There will be differences depending on the application of criminal liability and gross negligence.” Overseas, there is a trend to clarify responsibility in relation to personal information leakage incidents. We are strictly controlling illegal activities by companies by imposing fines amounting to hundreds of billions of won and punitive damages that are heavier than the actual damages received. In fact, T-Mobile, one of the three major U.S. telecommunications companies, also leaked the personal information of 77.6 million people through hacking in 2021. At that time, it decided to pay about 459 billion won in compensation, and affected customers received compensation of up to about 32 million won depending on the amount of damage. Attorney Cho said, "There are many cases overseas where large law firms hold companies accountable through consumer class action lawsuits. Consumers' right to choose, right to know, “We are actively working to ensure that all rights to safety are guaranteed,” he said. “We have not tried, but if we do not spare any legal assistance for the victims, there is a good chance of winning the case.” Attorney Cho also said, “No matter what type of criticism or pressure there is, we will stand on the side of the people who are victims and will not give up and fight the lawsuit until the end.” “We will do our best, and we will fulfill our social responsibility to prevent such problems from occurring again,” he added. Reporter Park Jae-gwan (paksunbi@fnnews.com)[View full article] “Among the large law firms, we are the only one taking the lead in the SKT lawsuit... due to public demand and mission” (link)

On the 29th, the Korean Federation of Teachers' Federation and Daeryun Law Firm (representative lawyer Kim Kuk-il, right in the photo) signed a business agreement (MOU) at the Teachers' Assembly Hall in Seocho-gu, Seoul to resolve various disputes and legal issues that may arise in school settings. The main contents of the agreement include ▲ legal consultation for recovery of infringement on teaching rights of members of the Korean Teachers' Association, ▲ legal advice such as requests for legislation and legal interpretation by the Korean Teachers' Federation, ▲ support for legal education for students and teachers, and ▲ promotion and commission of joint research (seminar, etc.) related to teaching rights and law. At the agreement ceremony, Kang Joo-ho, president of the teachers' union, said, “Like the recent Jeju teacher death incident, teachers in the field are suffering from serious malicious complaints and indiscriminate reports of child abuse,” and added, “We expect that this business agreement will provide professional legal support to teachers and greatly help in restoring teaching rights.”[View full article] Lawyers supporting restoration of church rights (link)

Daeryun Law Firm, which supports office space within Park One's Seoul headquarters branch office and provides legal advice on drama scripts, announced on the 28th that it provided legal advice on drama production along with providing a filming location for the tvN drama 'Unknown Seoul'. 'Unknown Seoul (written by Lee Kang, directed by Park Shin-woo and Nam Geon, planned by Studio Dragon, produced by Monster Union and High Ground)', which first aired on the 24th, is a lie in which twin sisters who are different in everything except their faces exchange their lives. It is a romantic coming-of-age drama about finding true love and life. Actors Park Bo-young and Park Jin-young, who are attempting to play two roles for the first time, are becoming a hot topic by participating as the main characters, and recorded the highest household viewership rating of 6.5% in the metropolitan area after only two episodes. Dae-ryun supported the filming location of the law firm in the drama. Based on Daeryun's actual work environment, including the lobby and conference room of Park One's Seoul headquarters branch office in Yeouido, the entire main office space was provided, adding to the sense of reality and immersion in the drama. In particular, it is said that it spared no effort in providing legal support at the law firm level, including providing legal advice during the script production process. Using the provision of the filming location for 'Unknown Seoul' as an opportunity, Daeryun expanded the provision of legal advice on drama production and further provided legal advice in various fields including dramas, movies, performances, and sports through the Entertainment and Sports Group. The plan is to strengthen support. Daeryun is expanding its influence within the industry by strengthening legal assistance across the industry, including consulting on various festivals and signing MOUs with entertainment and sports companies. Specifically, we provide help with △content copyright protection and license contract management △legal advice on platforms and distribution △content trademark and brand protection. Kim Kuk-il, CEO of Daeryun, said, "Daeryun is active not only in corporate law, but also in the entertainment and sports fields. We have spared no effort in minimizing legal risks that may arise during the production process of content such as dramas and providing support for successful completion." He added, "We will expand legal service support in various content industries in the future and help creators. “We will help you work in a more free and safe environment.” Reporter Cheon Ju-young (young1997@mydaily.co.kr)[View full article] My Daily - Daeryun, provided filming location and legal advice for tvN’s ‘Unknown Seoul’ (link) Sports Kyunghyang - ‘Unknown Seoul’ filming location and legal advice It turns out... (Go here) International News - Daeryun Law Firm provides filming location and legal advice for tvN drama ‘Unknown Seoul’ (Go here)

A group of people who extorted hundreds of millions of won from victims by using opposite-sex encounters as bait has been put on trial. The Ulsan District Prosecutors' Office announced that it had arrested and indicted Mr. A, the head of the investment fraud organization, on charges of telecommunications financial fraud and violating the Electronic Financial Transactions Act in April, and indicted five members of the organization, including those involved in the crime and those responsible for receiving funds, without detention. These people, including Mr. It was discovered that he committed the crime after approaching six people and encouraging them to sign up for a specific site, saying he would match them with aspiring idols or influencers. After registering, the victims were asked to participate in a betting game, saying that they could only meet the person they wanted by raising their level. In the beginning, only a small game participation fee was remitted and the profits were paid straight away, but it was revealed that after the betting amount increased, he received the profits and disappeared. It was confirmed that the amount they extorted from the victims amounted to 600 million won. The prosecution said, "This case is an organized crime with roles divided into the overall plan, execution plan, and money laundering plan," and "The nature of the crime is very bad in that it not only caused financial damage to the victim but also violated the Electronic Financial Transactions Act and the Telecommunications Business Act." Attorney Seo Bong-ha of Daeryun Law Firm, who represented Mr. “The method of inducing subscription and repeated remittance under the pretext of increasing ratings and guaranteed profits is a typical investment-inducing deception method,” he said. “Even if actual profits are initially returned, it is highly likely to be a typical fraud, so if requests for funds are repeated, you should immediately seek advice from the police or a legal expert.” He added, “Recently, it is evolving beyond simple scams disguised as dating to complex forms such as inducing investment or participating in virtual games under the pretense of matching the opposite sex.” He emphasized, “The method of repeatedly requesting money after forming emotional trust is a typical deception method similar to a romance scam, so it is important to quickly seek help from a legal expert if damage is suspected.” Reporter Hwang Jeong-won (jwhwang@mt.co.kr)[View full article] “I will help you meet aspiring idols”… Fraudster who stole 600 million won (Shortcut)

Daeryun Law Firm, which entered the top 10 law firms in the shortest period of time, expanded and relocated its Seongnam branch office to Pangyo, the ‘Silicon Valley of Korea’, announcing that it will become closer to customers of IT and Big Tech companies and lay the practical foundation for becoming a ‘global mega law firm’ by transplanting corporate legal advice overseas. Daeryun Law Firm is located in Seongnam Alpha Dome Tower. The Seongnam branch office of the Gyeonggi General Headquarters was relocated and opened. This opening is a strategic measure by Daeryun Law Firm to advance the establishment of a core legal hub in the Gyeonggi area and establish a legal response system specialized for the needs of the Pangyo region, the center of the technology industry. Alpha Dome Tower was built in 2007 as part of the Alpha Dome City development project in which LH (Korea Land and Housing Corporation) and others participated, and is adjacent to Pangyo Station on the Shinbundang Line, providing excellent accessibility from other areas. bragging Kakao, Naver, Snow, and other leading high-tech industries such as IT, gaming, and biotechnology are located here. These companies, which are different from traditional industries, also have new and diverse demands for legal advice. Recently, the need for new industry-specific legal fields such as data protection, AI ethics, corporate mergers and acquisitions, startup restructuring, and intellectual property disputes has been explosively increasing. It is known that leading large law firms are moving in. Through this relocation to Pangyo, Daeryun Law Firm plans to focus more on corporate legal fields such as ▲ corporate law, ▲ labor and personnel, ▲ intellectual property rights, ▲ startup establishment and investment contracts, and ▲ legal DD (due diligence) for tech companies. In addition, Daeryun Law Firm's Seongnam branch office is designed to increase accessibility to legal consultation for nearby office workers. We have deployed a large number of human resources in fields such as criminal, civil, tax, and administration. Kim Kuk-il, CEO of Daeryun Law Firm, said, “Pangyo is a technology cluster where Korea's leading IT companies are concentrated, and it has meaning beyond the simple relocation of a branch office.” He added, “As the technology industry and legal services must be elaborately interconnected, we will provide one-stop comprehensive legal services to corporate clients based on Daeryun's abundant practical experience and efficient work system.” Kim Kuk-il, CEO of Daeryun Law Firm, said, “Pangyo He added, “We will expand our contacts with innovative companies at home and abroad in the Gyeonggi region and establish ourselves as a law firm that grows together by embracing their technological ecosystem in a variety of ways.” Meanwhile, Daeryun Law Firm plans to expand its proven growth model in Korea on the global stage by opening its New York office in the U.S. as early as June and expanding into major overseas cities such as London and Hong Kong. Reporter Son Dong-wook, Lawleader, twson@lawleader.co.kr Law Leader - Daeryun Law Firm moves to a new home in the heart of Pangyo... expansion and relocation of the Gyeonggi General Headquarters Seongnam branch office (link) Gyeonggi Ilbo - Daeryun Law Firm, new home in Pangyo... Building and upgrading legal hub (Go here) Korea Economic Daily - Daeryun Law Firm expands and relocates Seongnam branch office to Alpha Dome Tower in Pangyo (Go here) International News - Daeryun Law Firm expands and relocates Seongnam branch office to Alpha Dome Tower in Pangyo... “Laying the foundation for a leap forward as a global mega law firm” (link)

The court ruled that the act of suddenly requesting compensation 15 years after the incident without proper notice was against the principles of good faith and was unfair. According to the legal community on the 28th, the 1st Civil Affairs Division of the Mokpo Branch of the Gwangju District Court ruled on the 22nd of last month that the government lost the lawsuit seeking compensation filed by the government against five people, including Mr. A, a man in his 30s. They were found guilty of assaulting the next soldier, Mr. B, while performing their military service in 2009. At the time, Unable to overcome the bullying in the compound, Mr. B attempted an extreme decision and eventually fell into a brain-dead state. Mr. B filed a lawsuit for damages for medical expenses, claiming that the incident occurred due to the government's neglect of management and supervision in 2017, and won. Five years later, the government paid about 2.7 billion won in compensation. Afterwards, the government last year claimed about 500 million won in compensation from five people, including Mr. A. According to Article 2 of the National Compensation Act. According to the state, when a public official or a person entrusted with public affairs causes damage to another person intentionally or through negligence, the state must compensate for the damage, and can seek compensation if the public official, etc. is grossly negligent. Mr. A and others countered that the government's claim for compensation was wrong. They said that the government paid medical expenses to Mr. B for a long time but did not inform them of this. In addition, they requested dismissal of the claim, saying that they did not notify them of the progress of the civil suit related to this. The court sided with Mr. A and others. “The plaintiff did not notify the defendant of this for several years while paying hospitalization and treatment expenses, and did not notify the defendant of the possibility of claiming compensation even after the civil judgment was issued,” he said. “The time when compensation was notified to the defendants was about 15 years after the incident occurred,” he said. He continued, “The defendants probably believed that the plaintiff would not pursue compensation and other separate responsibilities,” and added, “It is against the principles of good faith to make compensation related to the case at a time when so much time has passed.” He added. Attorney Cho Seong-geun of Daeryun Law Firm, who represented Mr. A, explained, "It cannot be considered appropriate to shift the financial burden in the name of compensation without any notice when a considerable amount of time has passed since the date of the incident. In addition, at the time of the incident, Mr. A and others were ordinary soldiers, not professional soldiers, and therefore the government had a duty to create an environment to prevent harsh acts from occurring." Jeong Eui-jin (jej88@ikbc.co.kr)[View full article] Sudden claim for compensation after 15 years of no notice? “Violation of the rules of good faith” (Shortcut)

An employee who issued a cash receipt without the consent of the restaurant owner and was sent to trial on charges of falsifying prior self-records was found not guilty by the appeals court following the first trial by proving that the work was done under the CEO's instructions. According to the legal community on the 27th, the Suwon District Court found A, a woman in her 40s, not guilty at the appellate trial in April on charges of falsifying dictionary records. By June, he was sent to trial on charges of issuing cash receipts without the consent of Mr. B, the restaurant owner. However, Mr. A denied the charges, saying that Mr. B made him report for value-added tax and pay for four major insurances while also ordering him to issue cash receipts and tax invoices. The prosecution requested a fine of 7 million won for Mr. A, but the first trial found him not guilty. In order to issue a cash receipt, you must go through an identity verification process using a mobile phone in the name of the business representative, but this is because there is no evidence that Mr. A obtained Mr. B's mobile phone. The court also determined that Mr. B was aware of the fact that transactions were being made in the name of the company, considering that he instructed Mr. A to pay the value-added tax and attempted to receive a refund. The appellate court also found the original judgment to be correct. When a transaction occurs in the name of a corporation, the issuance of tax invoices and cash receipts is a natural process that follows, so even if there was no separate approval from the final manager, it was judged that it can be interpreted as explicit or implicit consent. Attorney Seung-seok Ko of Daeryun Law Firm, the legal representative of Mr. A, said, “For a charge of forgery of prior electronic records to be recognized, it is necessary to falsely create or change another person's electronic records, and Mr. B delegated a number of tax-related tasks to Mr. A, and this situation was well explained at the trial. He explained, “I could have been found not guilty like the original trial.” Reporter Jeong Cheol-wook[View full article] A person in his 40s was found not guilty on the charge of unauthorized issuance of cash receipts... Court “implied consent of representative” (link)

There is less than a week left until the 21st presidential election. During this period, both prosecutors and police have no time to rest. This is because they are suffering from the issue of election fraud. In the 20th presidential election held three years ago, a total of 2,001 people were indicted, and 609 of them were sent to trial. This is a 127.9% increase compared to the 878 election offenders booked during the 19th presidential election in 2017. The background to this trend is the spread of false information through social media and an increase in the number of related complaints. Black propaganda and the spread of false facts surrounding candidates are occurring more frequently. The types are also very diverse. Representative examples include △false propaganda about personal information such as a candidate's education, career, military service, etc. △spreading false information about past criminal records △slandering opposing candidates △exaggerated claims about political achievements. Of course, it is difficult to view the simple act of conveying opinions as spreading false information, but false claims that can significantly affect voters' judgment may be subject to legal sanctions. While general defamation by revealing false information is punishable by up to 5 years in prison or a fine of up to 10 million won, under the Public Official Election Act, the crime of publishing false information for the purpose of losing an elected official can be punished by up to 7 years in prison or a fine of between 5 million won and 30 million won. There are many cases where inadvertently posted SNS posts or photos lead to punishment. It is now widely known that taking authentication photos inside a polling place is problematic, but it must also be kept in mind that taking photos of ballots inside a polling place is also a clear violation. Cases of damaging election posters also occur frequently. This can also be punishable by imprisonment for up to 2 years or a fine of up to 4 million won under Article 240 of the Public Official Election Act. There is a notable precedent in this regard. During the 2022 local elections, a voter was indicted on charges of damaging election posters. However, the court found him not guilty on charges of violating the Public Official Election Act. The idea is that the voter in question was illiterate and could not read, so it would have been difficult for him to recognize that the poster was for election campaign purposes. However, since the poster itself has property value, the crime of property damage was recognized and a fine was imposed. It is also important to be aware of the targets that can be used for election campaigning. In addition, it is important to note that according to Article 60 of the Public Official Election Act, public officials, officers at the level of company commander or higher in the reserve force, members of election commissions at each level, etc. are prohibited from campaigning in principle, as they are in a position to maintain the neutrality and fairness of elections. Of course, the Public Official Election Act has a relatively short statute of limitations of 6 months, so some point out that the investigation and prosecution of election offenders is done in a 'crammed manner'. Nevertheless, it is best to avoid unnecessary misunderstandings or violations, and special care is needed to ensure that the essence of democracy is not damaged by familiarizing yourself with the Public Official Election Act in general. Small and Medium Business Team[View full article] Public official election law that even supporters ignore... This job is the most dangerous (link)