Press Coverage

A mother who handed over her newborn to someone else through an adoption cafe right after giving birth was investigated for the first time in over 10 years, but was eventually cleared of charges. According to the legal community on the 9th, the Seoul Southern District Prosecutors' Office decided not to indict Mr. A, in his 30s, who was charged with child abandonment and neglect under the Child Welfare Act in March. Mr. A is accused of handing over the child to another person without proper protection after giving birth in 2013. The birth record is However, the investigation began with a report from a local community center employee who was suspicious that the birth had not been registered for over 10 years. Mr. A admitted that he handed over the child. However, he lost contact with the child's biological father at the time and claimed that he made this choice because he was concerned that the adoption record would remain on his birth certificate if he went through formal adoption procedures. At the time, he posted a post on an adoption cafe and was contacted by an infertile couple living overseas, and after meeting with them several times, he handed over the child. The prosecution decided not to file an indictment. Although it is true that Mr. A handed over the child without formal procedures, it is difficult to recognize the intentionality of child abandonment and neglect. The prosecution explained, "Under the Child Welfare Act, neglect must be recognized as causing damage equivalent to abandonment and physical and emotional abuse, but Mr. He added. Attorney Park Seong-dong of Daeryun Law Firm, who represented Mr. A, said, "Mr. A thought about the child's future from various angles even in difficult situations, including meeting and talking with the couple who expressed their intention to adopt 5 to 6 times. We were able to achieve a good result by emphasizing that, regardless of moral validity, the establishment of a crime must be judged strictly." Jeong Eui-jin (jej88@ikbc.co.kr)[View full article] Mother in her 20s who gave birth to a newborn...No charges found in investigation after 10 years (Shortcut)

A man in his 40s who was handed over to the prosecution on charges of starting a fire by throwing away a cigarette butt was cleared of charges. On March 21, the Goyang Branch of the Uijeongbu District Prosecutors' Office decided not to indict Mr. A, a man in his 40s who was transferred on charges of causing a fire. Last year, Mr. A was accused of starting a fire in a pile of trash by smoking a cigarette inside the house and then throwing a butt out the window without extinguishing the flame. The fire caused property damage worth about 200 million won, including burning cars parked nearby and structures including the interior and exterior walls of the building. The police forwarded the case to the prosecution for reasons such as the fact that the cigarette that Mr. A was smoking was the same as the type of butt found at the fire scene. Mr. A denied the charges, saying, “I usually smoke inside the house, but I did not smoke near the window on the day of the incident.” He emphasized, “Because we know that there are usually piles of trash on the first floor, there is no reason to throw lit cigarette butts out the window due to the possibility of fire.” Considering that the suspect's residence is located above the scene of the ignition and cigarette smoke was confirmed on CCTV, the prosecution ruled that Mr. A may be the owner of the butt that caused the ignition, but decided that it was not possible to confirm exactly where the butt fell, so they decided not to indict him. In addition, there was a smoker in another room of the same building at the time of the fire, so there was no evidence to confirm that Mr. A was the owner of the butt. Choi Seong-ho, an attorney at Daeryun Law Firm, said, “In order for a crime to be recognized in a criminal case, evidence that is convincing beyond reasonable doubt is needed. There is no data showing that Mr. A threw away the cigarette butt, and he was able to avoid prosecution by raising the possibility that the butt that someone else smoked was blown away by the wind.” Reporter Jeong Cheol-wook[View full article] Songchi, a man in his 40s, suffered 200 million won in damages by throwing away cigarette butts... Prosecutors decline to indict due to lack of evidence (link)

The defendant, who disobeyed the summary order, filed for trial directly and was acquitted. “Requests to confirm the truth about candidates for public office are not for slander purposes.” A man who had been indicted for defamation for posting suspicions surrounding a city council member candidate on a bulletin board was acquitted in court. On the 8th, the Suwon District Court acquitted Mr. A, a man in his 50s, who had been indicted for posting false information about a candidate running in the 2022 city council election on the Internet. Mr. A was sentenced on March 13. He was handed over to trial on charges of violating the Act on Promotion of Information and Communications Network Utilization and Information Protection (defamation). At the time, it was confirmed that Mr. A had posted on the Internet and personal SNS about the academic background and suspicion of abuse of power by Mr. B, who was a candidate for city council. The prosecution and the court determined that Mr. A was guilty of defamation and requested a summary order of 50 million won in fines, but Mr. A objected and requested a formal trial. At the trial, Mr. A claimed that he only posted a post requesting verification of the candidate's qualifications and that it was for the public interest, not for the purpose of malicious or aggressive defamation. Accordingly, the court ruled, "When looking at the defendant's post, he was requesting investigation and verification of the matter and there was no malicious attack." In addition, it acknowledged the public interest of Mr. A's actions, saying, "Whether or not the victim's academic background, who was an election candidate, was false is a subject of public interest," and the public interest of Mr. A's actions. Daeryun Law Firm, which represented Mr. A, said, "An act of publicly revealing facts for the purpose of slander is a crime of defamation, but if the facts concern the public interest, the purpose of slander is denied." The client (Mr. “It was not acknowledged,” he explained. Intern reporter Jeong Ye-eun (ye9@kyeonggi.com)[View full article] “It’s not for slander”… City council candidate in his 50s, not guilty for posting false information (link)

Remarks about being forced to hug and kiss... Victim: “The defendant shows no remorse. Please be severely punished.” The court said, “The defendant asks the victim to ‘act like a victim’… It is difficult to believe that he is truly remorseful.” A boss who molested a subordinate at a company dinner was sentenced to prison. On March 27, the Daejeon District Court sentenced Mr. A, a man in his 40s, to six months in prison on charges of forcible harassment. In addition, he was ordered to complete a 40-hour sexual violence treatment program. Mr. A was accused of forcibly hugging and sexually harassing his subordinate, Mr. B, at a company dinner last year. The court said, “The defendant not only molested the victim, but also regarded the victim as a sexual object and made obscene remarks about the victim to other team members,” and added, “It is difficult to say that he is truly remorseful by demanding that the victim act like a victim.” In addition, “The defendant made a surprise deposit the day before sentencing. He added, “We also took into account the fact that the victim refused to accept the receipt and is pleading for severe punishment.” Attorney Kim Jeong-beom of Daeryun Law Firm, who represented Mr. B in this case, said, “Mr. B had the courage to raise the issue of sexual harassment within the company, but was disadvantaged, including discrimination, and eventually suffered secondary damage by being unfairly dismissed.” Attorney Kim added, “During the trial, Mr. A did not even give a proper apology and said, ‘It is not a big deal, but the victim is making a fuss.’ “He showed a lack of remorse,” he explained. “It appears that the court also took this into consideration when sentencing him to prison.” Reporter Kim Jong-cheol (jckim99@sportsseoul.com)[View full article] The victim was fired after being sexually harassed at a company dinner... Court: “Defendant shows no remorse” sentenced to 6 months in prison (link)

The Seoul Central District Prosecutors' Office and a lawyer with experience as a trial researcher at the Supreme Court announced on the 8th that Daeryun Law Firm (Kook-il Kim and Byeong-jun Ko, Managing Director Attorneys) plans to closely respond to the increasing number of medium-to-large cases by launching a special execution division ('Special Division') to increase case processing expertise and efficiency with the Litigation Management Headquarters. Daeryun Law Firm's Special Division is responsible for carrying out (led by the division) medium-to-large cases that are difficult to respond to at the individual group level. The organization consists of Special Department 1 (Civil and Administrative) and Special Department 2 (Criminal). Daeryun Law Firm says, “The Special Department system presents a new direction in handling medium to large-sized cases. Together with the recently established Litigation Management Headquarters, it is a strategy to maximize the expertise and efficiency of case handling,” and “Rather than simply ‘increasing the number of people’ and randomly assigning lawyers, the head of the division organizes lawyers specializing in each field to manage medium to large-sized cases. “We can build a system,” he explained. Attorney Young-gon Cho (16th Judicial Research and Training Institute) serves as the head of the Special Department and the head of the Special Department 2, leading the entire group. Attorney Cho, who served as Chief of the Seoul Central District Prosecutors' Office and Chief of the Daegu District Prosecutors' Office, took on major cases such as the investigation of the Four Major Rivers Project and the recovery of fines from former Presidents Chun Doo-hwan and Roh Tae-woo when he was Chief Prosecutor, and was equipped with legal advice and investigative response to numerous companies, including unfair trade practices of leading domestic and foreign companies. The first special department head is Attorney Sang-won Yeo (Judicial Research and Training Institute), who served as Chief Judge of the Seoul Central District Court and the Seoul Eastern District Court. 17th class) is responsible. Attorney Yeo, who has been in public service as a judge for 23 years, will lead the civil affairs group based on her experience as a trial researcher at the Supreme Court and as a Korean commercial arbitrator. The standing attorneys are Ui-seok Lee (6th trial), a real estate lawyer and expropriation and compensation lawyer at the Korean Bar Association, and Myeong-cheol Kim (47th class of the Judicial Research and Training Institute), who represented an ‘Incheon investment tycoon’ in a 67 billion won fraud case, respectively, taking charge of civil administration and criminal cases. Support. The launch of Daeryun Law Firm’s Special Department is significant in that it carries out the entire litigation process, from ‘consultation-distribution-management’, with professional lawyers. If a case is classified as a medium or large-scale case, the Special Action Headquarters responds after consultation is conducted by a lawyer specializing in counseling within the Litigation Management Headquarters, which Daeryun launched last month. Recent cases that the Daeryun Special Department is responding to include △ A dispute over construction costs by an apartment complex reconstruction association, △ Virtual currency group fraud damage, and △ Large construction company B's unfair debt dispute. Regarding the Apartment A case, Director Cho explained the strategy, saying, “Constructors often avoid construction cost disputes by ‘taking time,’” and “Daeryun minimizes the burden on union members through the process of ‘contract review → request for evidence → analysis of negotiation structure → response to termination.’” Regarding the future direction of the special department, Attorney Cho chose ‘legal activism.’ Attorney Cho said, “The purpose of the special department is not just to represent litigation, but to diagnose the risk structure before a problem occurs.” He added, “The goal is not only to minimize the spread of damage, but ultimately to come up with a plan to improve the system.” Kim Kook-il, CEO of Daeryun Law Firm, said, “In the case of medium to large cases, multiple cases are often merged, so it is important that lawyers with specialized knowledge are brought in at the same time.” He added, “A legal expert with nearly 40 years of experience in the legal field. “Because the team is led by ‘veterans’, we are able to provide clear strategies and direction to our clients,” he said. Law Leader Reporter Son Dong-wook twson@lawleader.co.kr Law Leader - 40-year legal veteran leads medium to large-scale cases... Daeryun Law Firm launches Special Action Headquarters (Go here) Korea Economic Daily - A 40-year legal veteran leads medium to large-scale cases... Daeryun, launch of special execution headquarters (link) Korea Economic Daily - Dae-ryun establishes a special department within the law firm (link)

Daeryun Law Firm: “Security and reliability must be thoroughly secured” An era has begun where patients can directly manage and utilize their medical records and health information. This is because the ‘right to request transmission of personal information’ system was implemented in earnest following the enforcement of the revised ‘Personal Information Protection Act’ in March. Legal experts advised that a technical and management system must be established as a major change has begun in the data flow between medical institutions and patients. On the 7th, Daeryun Law Firm introduced the systems that companies and institutions must have through a corporate and implications report on the revised personal information processing policy guidelines. The 'right to request transmission of personal information' is the right of the information subject to request that his or her personal information be transmitted to him or her or a third party, and the 'right to data portability' stipulated in the European Union's (EU) General Data Protection Regulation (GDPR) is adapted to domestic circumstances. This system was introduced. This system is a key axis of the 'My Data' policy that ensures that individuals can independently integrate and utilize their information on various platforms, and is being applied sequentially in sensitive information fields such as medical care, communications, and finance. Among them, the medical field is one of the core application areas of this system, and it is believed that it could have a significant impact on the future medical treatment and health management system. With the implementation of this system, patients will be able to use the Korea Disease Control and Prevention Agency, National Health Insurance Service, Health Insurance Review and Assessment Service, and tertiary general hospitals. Vaccination records, health checkup results, medical treatment details, medication history, diagnosis information, etc., which were distributed across public and private institutions, can be received directly or transmitted to the desired institution or platform. This makes it possible to transfer medical records between hospitals as well as integrated health management through the personal health record (PHR) platform. The Personal Information Protection Committee is expanding the scope of My Data application to the medical field, communications, energy, etc., and plans to establish a more solid institutional foundation for medical information transmission by 2026. Transmission of personal information must be done through a specialized intermediary agency, and is only permitted through encryption and API methods. Scraping methods are prohibited, and medical data is stored and utilized through specialized 'specialized organizations'. However, information that can be transmitted is limited to information provided by the information subject or created through activities, and data (risk prediction, profiling results, etc.) analyzed and processed by the hospital itself is, in principle, not included in the transmission target. Exceptionally, diagnostic information can be transmitted under the Medical Service Act. Officials predict that the institutionalization of the right to request personal information transmission in medical settings will not only establish patient-centered health information sovereignty, but will also become the basis for precision medicine and customized health management services in the future. Daeryun Law Firm said, "A patient-centered medical data utilization system has begun," and added, "Medical institutions such as general hospitals must thoroughly ensure the security and reliability of the data transmission process, considering the nature of handling sensitive personal information." He continued, "PHR. He added, “Platforms and digital healthcare companies, as recipients of transmitted data, must also meet the My Data registration requirements and have a technical and management system that guarantees the rights of information subjects.” Meanwhile, as the My Data project is recently on track, the government is also preparing specific guidelines for the transmission of My Data personal information. On the 6th, the Personal Information Protection Committee published the 'Guide to the MyData Personal Information Transmission Request System in All Fields', a draft of which was released in March last year and collected opinions.[View full article] “Medical information is now carried by patients”... Full-fledged implementation of transmission request rights (click here)

Served as Chief Judge of the Ansan Branch of the Seoul Central District Court and Suwon District Court... Daeryun Law Firm (CEOs Kim Kuk-il and Ko Byeong-jun), which has 21 years of experience as a judge and has excellent track records, including winning civil lawsuits worth 20 billion won and acquitting high-ranking public officials in criminal cases, has strengthened its litigation capabilities by recruiting lawyer Shin Il-soo (19th class of the Judicial Research and Training Institute), who served as chief judge of the Seoul Central District Court. Attorney Shin passed the 29th bar exam in 1987 and took his first steps into the legal field by being appointed as a judge of the Eastern Branch of the Busan District Court in 1990. Afterwards, he served as a judge at the Seoul District Court and Seoul High Court, and then as chief judge at the Seoul Central District Court, Suwon District Court, and Jeju District Court. He worked as a judge for 21 years and was active in various cases in the civil, criminal, and domestic affairs fields, and served as a standing mediator of the Seoul High Court and Seoul Central District Court from 2021 to 2025. The standing mediator system is a system that mediates and handles civil disputes without going through trial procedures, and is selected from among those with more than 10 years of legal experience or more than 3 years of experience as a civil or domestic affairs mediator. In particular, Attorney Shin has achieved outstanding results, such as defending Suwon A Cooperative to victory in a civil lawsuit worth 20 billion won, and obtaining a final not guilty verdict in the case of Park Ji-won, a member of the Democratic Party of Korea (then floor leader of the Democratic United Party), violating the Aggravated Punishment Act for specific crimes (e.g., aggravated punishment) for high-ranking public officials. Based on his expertise in the civil and criminal fields, he was also active in legal interviews for numerous broadcasting and newspaper companies. Attorney Shin will reside at the Yongsan branch office in Seoul and directly handle civil and criminal cases handled across the country. Lawyer Shin said, "'Integrity is the best virtue in life. He who goes steadily will eventually outpace those who go fast,' and he served as a judge for a long time and took charge of cases in various fields under the motto," and added, "The same is true after becoming a lawyer. My experience as a judge is a great help in carrying out litigation work. At Daeryun, we will carefully handle our clients' cases through the weapon of 'steady sincerity.'" CEO Kim Kook-il said, “Lawyers who were former chief judges are also handling cases directly, so I think Attorney Shin’s long experience will be of great help in strengthening Daeryun’s litigation capabilities,” and added, “We are improving the internal system, such as establishing a litigation management headquarters, and I am looking forward to Attorney Shin’s role as well.” Reporter Jeong Young-cheol (jyc6131@sejungilbo.com)[View full article] Sejeong Ilbo - Daeryun Law Firm recruits lawyer Shin Il-soo, former chief judge... Strengthening Litigation Competency (Shortcut) Segye Ilbo - Daeryun Law Firm recruits lawyer Shin Il-soo, a former chief judge... Strengthening Litigation Competency (Shortcut) Roishu - Daeryun recruits lawyer Shin Il-soo, former chief judge... Strengthening Litigation Competency (Shortcut) Seoul Shinmun - Daeryun Law Firm recruits lawyer Shin Il-soo, former chief judge (link) Tax and Finance News - Daeryun recruits lawyer Shin Il-soo, former chief judge... Strengthening the Litigation Department (Click here) International News - Former Chief Judge Shin Il-soo joins Daeryun... Rich practical experience, including winning a 20 billion won civil case (Go here)

A doctor who was suspected of issuing false receipts to patients and stealing insurance money has been cleared of the charges. Dongtan Police Station in Hwaseong, Gyeonggi Province, decided not to forward Mr. A, a doctor who was booked on charges of violating the Special Act on Prevention of Insurance Fraud last March. Mr. A is accused of issuing receipts with false medical expenses to patients for three years since 2019 and collecting 800 million won in actual insurance money based on these. The insurance company requested the police to investigate, saying that Mr. A issued receipts without performing surgery and caused patients to make false insurance claims. However, Mr. A denied the charges, saying, “Patients who were burdened with surgery costs had difficulty paying in full, so we first cut off the receipt so that they could pay only a portion of the surgery fee in advance and pay the remaining amount after receiving the insurance money.” The police determined that Mr. A was not guilty. A police official said, “The suspect received insurance money from patients as surgical expenses.” “The facts are acknowledged,” he said, but “except for the false receipt, the other documents, including the surgery confirmation, were written truthfully.” He also said, “There are no circumstances of forcing or inducing patients to undergo surgery, and there is no confirmation of conspiring to commit a crime.” He also ruled, “It cannot be considered that the insurance company was deceived.” Lawyer So-young Yoon of Daeryun Law Firm, who was in charge of Mr. “An insurance claim cannot be considered false just because payment has not been completed,” he explained. Jeong Eui-jin (jej88@ikbc.co.kr)[View full article] “I issued a false receipt”…Doctor booked for insurance fraud ‘not guilty’ (Shortcut)

A hair shop employee who was sent to the prosecution on charges of making unfair profits by using customer information after moving to a competitor company was not indicted. On March 18, the Cheonan Branch of the Daejeon District Prosecutors' Office dismissed employee A, who was accused of violating the Unfair Competition Prevention and Trade Secret Protection Act (Unfair Competition Prevention Act), with 'no charges'. It was disposed of. Mr. A worked as a designer at a franchise beauty salon in July of last year, but when he moved to a competitor, he is accused of stealing trade secrets, including customer lists, and using them for business activities. The company filed a complaint, saying it had suffered enormous losses in business due to Mr. A. The purpose is that Mr. A contacted customers and induced them to refund their memberships. According to Article 18, Paragraph 2 of the Unfair Competition Prevention Act, if a company's trade secrets are leaked to the outside world, you can be punished by imprisonment for up to 10 years or a fine of up to 500 million won. Mr. A denied all charges. It is claimed that the customers contacted Mr. A voluntarily and that he never induced them to move the hair salon during this process. The prosecution decided that the charges were not admissible. The prosecution said, “It is acknowledged that Mr. A used information he learned while working after leaving the company, but it cannot be said that he used the trade secret for the purpose of causing damage to the company, considering that a customer he was previously in contact with contacted Mr. A first.” Attorney Kim Hyun-soo of Daeryun Law Firm, who represented Mr. A, said, “Trade secret infringement occurs when the trade secret is acquired and used for the purpose of making unfair profits through the trade secret or causing damage to the holder of the trade secret.” “It applies,” he explained, adding, “We were able to receive a non-indictment decision thanks to the fact that it was not confirmed that Mr. A persuaded or instructed customers to refund.” Digital Content Team[View full article] Hair shop designer accused of stealing customer information from former company... Prosecution: “Not indicted” (Shortcut)

Kim Tae-hwan, Daeryun Law Firm, a lawyer specializing in intellectual property rights, Q&A these days chatGPTIt's trendy to create Ghibli-style profiles.. The cute and warm illustrations make you smile the moment you see them, but the original photo is captured by artificial intelligence.(AI)learning this, It can be scary to think that it can be used for something else.. generative AI ChatGPTIs 2022year 11Since the launch of the month, issues related to personal information management have been consistently raised.. When using the service, personal information AIThis is because it cannot be free from privacy infringement issues in that it is learned and stored..Problems with personal information protection AI Occurs during the learning process. AIis the text, Patterns while processing unstructured data such as images, structure, Learn arrays, etc.. At this time AIis resident registration number, address, You may not be aware that your health information is sensitive personal information.. Therefore, information may be exposed in the process of memorizing and reprinting learned information.. Due to these factors, there is a possibility that personal information may be leaked or the rights of the information subject may be violated..We heard from a lawyer specializing in intellectual property rights about legal issues and countermeasures related to this.. This is a Q&A exchange with Kim Tae-hwan, a lawyer specializing in intellectual property rights at Daeryun Law Firm..▶ AI If the model learned and used individual information, could it be a violation of the Personal Information Protection Act??AI When the model learns and uses individual personal information, This may be a problem as it violates the Personal Information Protection Act.. According to the Personal Information Protection Act, a legitimate legal basis is essential for collecting, using, and providing personal information.. Personal Information Protection Act15The article stipulates that when collecting and using personal information, the consent of the information subject or legal requirements must be met..Same law15Joe and Je17Joe restricts the use or provision of personal information for purposes other than those intended.. The problematic part in this case is 'Data Subject Consent'It can be seen that. In order to process personal information, the consent of the data subject must be obtained first.. but, AI If the personal information included in the data learned by the model is already public information, there may be cases where it can be processed without consent, so review is necessary..Another issue depends on how to recognize the legitimate interests of the personal information processor.. The purposes for processing personal information must be based on reasonable and legitimate business needs;, The purpose must be evaluated as having priority over the rights or interests of the information subject..In other words, no matter how great the personal information processor's interests are, it may cause excessive infringement on the information subject or, If personal information is used in a way that the information subject does not expect 'legitimate interests'This means it is not recognized. In these situations, personal information AI Let them learn 2Secondary use increases the likelihood of violating the Personal Information Protection Act..Personal information provision notice text, Even if it is too small, it is illegal ▶ With the development of science and technology, problems with personal information processing are increasing.. If you have suffered personal information leakage, what are your countermeasures??Legal measures that can be taken in response to damage from personal information leakage mainly include fines or surcharges from administrative agencies., Civil damages claim, The same method as criminal charges can be used.. actually AIThis is a difficult issue as the representative lawsuit related to this has not yet been proceeded in Korea.. As for issues related to personal information, the Homeplus case is a representative criminal case.(supreme court 2017. 4. 7. sentence 2016do13263 judgment)An example can be given.. Personal information protection laws are enforced in the process of collecting and providing personal information for the sweepstakes.15Failure to properly comply with the notices pursuant to Article, Personal Information Protection Act17This is a case where the regulations regarding the provisions were not properly followed..In particular, notices regarding provision of personal information are written in small letters., It was not a situation where consumers could sufficiently read and agree.. This violates the legal requirement that clear notice and consent must be provided in the process of obtaining consent from the information subject.. Ultimately, the Personal Information Protection Act72Preparation2Ho and Je59Preparation1In accordance with no., Homeplus and the person in charge were held criminally responsible.. The incident 'lack of consent'class 'unclear notice'This is a case of violation of the Personal Information Protection Act and can be said to be an important precedent that sets legal standards for similar cases in the future..▶ Personal information processor AI In the case of service providers, what strategies should be developed to comply with related laws such as the Personal Information Protection Act??AI There is a possibility that the model's process of learning and using personal information may violate personal information protection laws.. thus AI Developers and service providers must clarify the legitimate legal basis and, Safety and the rights of information subjects must be thoroughly guaranteed.. Even when processing personal information disclosed in accordance with the Personal Information Protection Act, the legal basis and safety standards must be complied with., It is important to clearly obtain consent from the information subject..A specific consent procedure must be established and personal information must be thoroughly managed to ensure that it is not used or provided for purposes other than the purpose for which it was processed.. Safety measures must also be strengthened to prevent personal information leaks.. Safety is ensured under the Personal Information Protection Act.29Establishment of an internal management plan as specified in Article, It must include technical, managerial and physical measures related to access record storage, etc.. [View full article] “Is it okay for everyone to have their Ghibli profile leaked?”... Chat GPT and personal information infringement (link)