Senior Advisor Choi Gyu-Wan has been appointed as an advisory member of the National Forestry Cooperative Federation.  The Federation promotes the rights and interest of forest land owners and people working in forestry in order to achieve sustainable management of forests and thereby contribute to balanced development of the nation.

Attorney Kim Chu has been appointed as the Vice Chairman of the Korean Bar Association’s Special Committee on the Selection of Outstanding Lawyers, on July 19, 2023.  The Special Committee on the Selection of Outstanding Lawyers select outstanding lawyers once every quarter for outstanding arguments, defending public interest, defending the legal vocation, etc.

Attorney Kim Chu has been reappointed as the member (Head Editor) of the Newsletter Editorial Committee of the Seoul Bar Association on July 17, 2023. The Newsletter Editorial Committee is a group that discusses of the articles to be published in the Association’s monthly newsletter.

Attorney Kim Chu has been appointed as the member of the Construction Dispute Mediation Committee of the Ministry of Land, Infrastructure and Transport on July 12, 2023.

Attorney Kim Chu has been appointed as the Public Interest Lawyer of the Seoul Metropolitan Government on July 1, 2023.  His appointment will be from July 1, 2023 to June 30, 2025.

Attorney Park Sang-Oh has been reappointed as an adjunct professor of Sung Kyun Kwan University.  He will be giving lectures on ESG Management and the Corporate Law in the second semester of 2023.

1. Case summary and issues In the promotional materials and booklet-type election notices of Mayor A of Cheonan-si for the 8th National Local Elections (“Mayor A”), the employment rates of Cheonan-si as of the end of 2021 were listed, but the phrase "based on local governments with a population of 500,000" was omitted due to a mistake by the workers. The Cheonan North District Election Committee decided that Mayor A had made false statements for the purpose of winning the election and filed a complaint against him. During the investigation into Mayor A's false disclosure of facts, the investigative agency became suspicious that some officials of the Cheonan government had used their official positions to participate in election campaigns and campaign planning. After conducting extensive seizure and search activities and investigation into the relevant parties, it filed an indictment against Mayor A for conspiring to use his official positions to campaign and participate in campaign planning. We represented Mayor A from the stage of responding to the investigators’ seizure and search against him to the first trial at the Cheonan District Court in Daejeon, and vigorously defended his innocence.   2. Our argument and role We defended Mayor A from the early stage of investigation, and vigorously argued that the evidence submitted by the prosecution was inadmissible since it was illegally obtained. First, we thoroughly analyzed the legal principles related to the search warrant and the search procedure, arguing that there was no “objective connection” between the criminal facts described in the first search warrant and the seized evidence, and pointing out that the prosecution should have obtained an additional search warrant under the law on “accidentally discovered evidence (Zufallsfunde Beweis)”, but failed to do so. Thanks to our meticulous digital forensics and electronic information selection procedures during the investigation phase, we were able to strongly argue that the prosecution had failed to comply with due process by failing to identify the point at which it became aware of the additional suspicions and obtain an additional search warrant. We reviewed all 40,000+ pieces of seized electronic information to individually determine their relevance to the criminal facts alleged in the initial search warrant, and then submitted a detailed defense brief in which we identified irrelevant evidence and requested the court to preclude those pieces of irrelevant evidence. On a substantive level, We vigorously defended Mayor A, arguing that he had no knowledge of election campaigns or election campaign planning involved by the officials of the Cheonan government or had never participated in the election campaigns or election campaign planning, and that the omission of the phrase “based on local governments with a population of 500,000” was a simple mistake by a clerk and was not intentional.  3. Summary and meaning of the investigation result Under the provisions of the Public Offices Election Act, if an elected person is sentenced to imprisonment or a fine of 1 million won or more for violating the Public Offices Election Act during the election, the election is invalidated, so this was an important case in which the election of the incumbent mayor of Cheonan-si was at stake. In particular, election campaigns conducted by using a public official's position is the most severe crime under the Public Offices Election Act, with a statutory penalty of “imprisonment for not more than five years,” so if an elected person is convicted, the election will be invalidated. Accepting our argument, the Cheonan Branch of the Daejeon District Court held that evidence related to the prosecution brought with regard to election campaigns conducted by using a public official's position was inadmissible as illegally collected evidence with no objective connection to the criminal facts described in the search warrant. This ruling is significant because it clearly states the general principle that investigative agencies can only seize evidence that is relevant to the criminal facts specified in the search warrant in the process of executing the search warrant, especially in the process of searching and selecting electronic information. The Cheonan District Court also accepted our substantive arguments and determined that it could not be said to have been proven beyond a reasonable doubt that Mayor A committed the crime as charged in the indictment, even when the evidence was considered in its entirety. The incumbent mayor of Cheonan-si was able to prevent the election from being invalidated by our vigorous defense.  □ Attorneys in charge : Han Myung-kwan, Choi Jae-ho, Choi Kyung-jin

1. Case summary ① The party represented by us (attorneys: Park Sung-ho, Kim Jun-ho, Min Kyung-chan and Shim Hyuna): A defendant who was charged with violating the Public Offices Election Act (who is a current mayor, “Mayor A”) ② Case background: The prosecutor accused Mayor A of the following three charges: - Mayor A who had been charged with violating the Public Offices Election Act, but had been sentenced to a fine of KRW800,000, which does not constitute an election invalidation sentence, conspired with his secretary to send text messages to voters to conduct election campaign activities before the designated election campaign period and engaged in the election campaign activities as a local official not allowed to engage in election campaigns; - Mayor A, in collusion with his subordinates, attempted to hold the “2nd Anniversary of the 7th Civil Election”, but when it was complained to him by the competent election commission that the event might violate the Election Act, he changed the name of the event and proceeded with the event as planned while providing food and drink such as coffee and rice cakes to employees and holding the event and making donations between 60 days before the election date; and - In the election bulletin for the 8th local election, Mr. A listed railroad lines that had not yet completed preliminary feasibility studies or had not even been subjected to preliminary feasibility studies as “confirmed railroad lines,” and listed railroad lines that had only been subjected to a procedure to make a contract for preliminary feasibility studies as “conducting preliminary feasibility studies for the railroad lines,” thereby publicizing false facts. ③ Litigation and our role: We defended Mayor A, arguing that the fact that he was sentenced to a fine of KRW800,000 does not indicate that he will run for local elections in the future; that Mayor A did not hold an inauguration ceremony but merely made a visit to encourage his employees, so it was a legitimate act of duty; that the provision of food of about KRW3,700 per person to his employees did not violate social norms, so the illegality could be carved out; and that the content regarding the railroad construction could not be concluded to be false because the important parts were consistent with objective facts. 2. Judgment (Pyeongtaek Branch of the Suwon District Court Decision 2022Gohap264 dated July21, 2023)Regarding the text message, the court of first instance held that it was difficult to conclude that the content of the text message stating that Mayor A had been fined KRW800,000 was an act to promote his election in the next local election, and that the text message was not an election campaign but a routine social activity. Regarding the event and the donation, the court of first instance held that the content of the employee encouragement event, which was revised after being pointed out by the Election Commission, did not appear to be for the purpose of commemorating the second anniversary of his inauguration, and that it did not violate social norms, considering that other local governments often held events to encourage employees who performed COVID-19 prevention duties, and that the event was limited to employees of the local government and did not exceed the scope of encouragement events normally held in the workplace.In addition, since it was a natural time to encourage employees who had been performing their duties caused by the COVID-19 pandemic, and the price of the food was only modest, the court of first instance held that the rice cakes, coffee, and lunch provided during the employee encouragement event did not constitute a donation. Regarding the statements in the election gazette that “construction of a railroad was confirmed” and “pre-feasibility study was conducted”, the court of first instance held that it was important for a local government to obtain an achievement in which a railroad route was reflected in the National Railroad Network Construction Plan, so it was difficult to view the statement as false even if it was stated as “a railroad being confirmed to be constructed”.Similarly, the process of selecting a contractor to conduct a pre-feasibility study could be included in the pre-feasibility study stage, and the expression “conduct” could also be used to mean “the process or stage has begun and is in progress”, so it was not deceptive even if the tender for the selection of a service provider was completed and it was described as “conducting a pre-feasibility study”.  3. Significance of the judgment Election trials risk distorting the democratic legitimacy granted by voters through elections, as the outcome may result in the removal of an elected official from office. The significance of the above judgment is that the court carefully examined the conduct of Mayor A and his subordinates and interpreted the provisions of the Public Offices Election Act in a way that was in line with social conventions, making a careful judgment based on the nature of election trials.□ Attorneys in charge : Park Sung-ho, Kim Jun-ho, Min Kyung-chan, Shim Hyuna

1. Case summary ① Who did Barun Law represent? Barun Law represented a subcontractor (“Company A”) under a conversion plant facility construction contract. ② Case background A contractor (“Company B”) contracted Company A to construct the foundation of the post of the conversion station on the site owned by it and contracted a company (“Company C”) to supervise the above construction. During the construction process, Company B changed the location of the post from the original design and instructed Company A to construct it as closely as possible to the fence. During the construction process, Company A changed the location of the post according to Company B’s instructions and damaged an underground transmission line belonging to a company (“Company D”). The construction contract between Company A and Company B stipulated that the other party (i.e., the subcontractor Company A) shall carefully identify the location of underground obstructions such as power cables in the conversion station site before commencing construction and take sufficient measures to prevent safety accidents. ③ Litigation Based on the provision of the construction contract above, Company B, the contractor, claimed that the responsibility for the accident was entirely on Company A, which carried out the construction without carefully identifying the location of the obstruction, and filed an arbitration application with the Korean Commercial Arbitration Board, claiming approximately KRW 1 billion in damages against Company A and Company C in accordance with the arbitration agreement made by the parties. 2. Our role We represented the subcontractor, Company A, and argued that if the cause of the accident was due to the contractor’s gross negligence regarding the contract or instruction, the contractor would be liable for damages (in accordance with the proviso of Article 757 of the Civil Code), and that the precedent of a similar case in which the Supreme Court held that the contractor was primarily responsible and that the liability ratio was 70% should be applied to this case. Specifically, we emphasized that the accident in this case happened on a site owned by the contractor, Company B, and that the owner of the underground transmission line, Company D, was likely to have received approval from Company B regarding the location of the transmission line during the installation process. We further argued that Company B was obligated to notify Company A of the location of the transmission line, which it was familiar with, during the contracting and instruction process, and that the accident could have been avoided had Company B used care by notifying Company A of the location, but Company B did not do so, and therefore, Company B’s gross negligence was the main cause of the accident. 3. Arbitration award rendered by the Korean Commercial Arbitration Board Accepting our argument, the Korean Commercial Arbitration Board awarded as follows: ● It seems that the accident was caused by the gross negligence of Company B because it owns and occupies the construction site and is most familiar with the situation, and if it had kept normal business reports or related documents on the construction of the transmission line of Company D, it could have easily identified the location and avoided the accident; ● It is in accordance with the legal principles of torts and equity that Company B, which was deeply involved in the construction of the transmission line, should bear the responsibility, not Company A, which had nothing to do with the construction of Company D, the owner of the transmission line; and ● The proportion of damages is recognized as 70% for the contractor, Company B, 24% for the subcontractor, Company A, and 6% for the supervisor, Company C. 4. Significance of the arbitration award Even if a subcontractor has only a minor fault in the performance of construction work, the contractor sometimes attempts to use various obligations of the subcontractor generally stipulated in the contract as a weapon to impose excessive liability on the subcontractor compared to the actual fault of the subcontractor. However, as the subcontractor is in the position of being paid by the contractor and having to contract for other work in the future, the subcontractor is often forced to settle for huge damages based on the contractor's unilateral claim without being able to strongly argue that the contractor is responsible. This case is significant in that it confirms that the contractor’s gross negligence in design and instruction cannot be excused by the subcontractor’s broad obligation clause, which is intended to give the contractor an excuse for indemnification, and that even if the subcontractor is at minor fault, it is unfair for the subcontractor to assume all liability. A subcontractor should closely examine the contents of the construction contract and the specific facts of the case in order to respond to the contractor’s unjustified claims for damages. □ Attorneys in charge : Park Sung-ho, Kim Jun-ho

1. Case summary ○ Violation of the Act on Special Cases Concerning the Punishment of Sexual Crimes (taking a picture with a camera) The suspect, who was in a romantic relationship with the complainant from 2020 to 2022, took a picture of the complainant's body against her will, which could cause sexual desire or shame, by photographing the complainant sitting on a bed wearing only underwear at a motel in Gyeonggi-do in 2020. 2. Our argument and role The case began when the police obtained a search warrant and searched the suspect's residence, cell phone, etc. without the suspect's knowledge of the complaint. We defended the suspect, arguing that he was in a romantic relationship with the complainant and that the photographs she was referring to were taken with her consent, but the police sent the case to the prosecutor's office for prosecution as there was insufficient evidence to support the claims against the suspect. In response, we reinforced the counsel, and presented evidence to the prosecution to prove that the complainant had consented, or at least that there was general and implied consent, including: 1) evidence that during the course of their relationship, the complainant took a significant number of consensual photographs, including photographs of the complainant in her underwear; 2) photographs of herself that had been taken by the complainant in a suggestive manner and had been sent to the suspect prior to the alleged offense; and 3) the photos of her naked backside that were taken and sent by the complainant to the suspect after the alleged offense; and 4) messages requesting that the suspect take photos of his sensitive areas and send them to the complainant. Actively defending the suspect, we were able to lead to the prosecution’s request for a supplemental investigation. Later, based on the newly submitted evidence at the prosecution stage, the police investigated the suspect closely by summoning him for an interview, and were persuaded by our active defense work to change its previous opinion of prosecution and to dismiss the suspect without charge. The prosecution also decided to return the records, closing the case. 3. Meaning of the decision not to send the case to the prosecution (with no charge) When a person is accused of a sexual offense such as this case, it is difficult for the suspect to deal with the investigation properly due to concerns about criminal punishment and loss of social image. In this case, through the advice and representation of our firm from the initial investigation stage, the suspect was able to consistently state his innocence, and after being sent to the prosecution, we strengthened his counsel and collected additional evidence to overturn the complainant's claims and prove that the suspect's actions were based on her consent. It is highly unusual for the police to reverse their initial opinion and decide not to prosecute a case when the complainant has not withdrawn the complaint. In order to persuade the police and prosecutors who are investigating a case based on the complainant's allegations, it is necessary to quickly retain counsel with expertise in the field, and to follow their advice to accurately identify the issues and credible evidence.□ Attorneys in charge : Cho Jae-bin, Seol Jae-sun

1. Overview of the caseThe client was an employee of a conglomerate affiliate, and in preparation for his retirement, he sent files of materials that he had created and kept in the course of his work to his personal email account, which was discovered during the internal audit of the company's retirees, and as a result, he was investigated on suspicion of violating the Unfair Competition Act (leakage of trade secrets, etc.) on the complaint of the company.2. Our argument and RulingIn the above case, we strongly pointed out that, although the client had sent the files to his personal email account, he deleted all the files as instructed by the company as soon as it was confirmed; that the digital forensic results of the seizure of the client's cell phone and other devices did not confirm the files or the use thereof by the client; and that the client's behavior could not be qualified as constituting the acquisition, use, or disclosure of trade secrets to a third party.The investigative agency concluded that the criminal allegations that the client used the trade secrets or leaked them to a third party could not be proven in light of the facts of the client's defense and the results of the seizure and search, and that the criminal allegation of acquiring the trade secrets could not be proven because the client was in a position to use the trade secrets as an employee of the complainant company at the time, so the investigative agency decided not to prosecute the client for all the allegations of violating the Unfair Competition Prevention Act (i.e., disclosure of trade secrets).□ Attorneys in charge: Park Sang-Oh and Gu Na-Yul

We provided advisory service for Tawoong Logics on acquisition of all of the outstanding shares in Transall (for approximately KRW 12.6 billion), and successfully completed the transaction.Taewoong Logistics is a company engaged in the warehousing, distribution, and transportation business, including the air transportation chartering business, and pursued a deal to acquire Transall, a specialized air cargo company, to strengthen its competitiveness in the air transportation business. Accordingly, Taewoong Logistics entered into a share purchase agreement with the existing shareholders of Transall on June 21, 2023, and finally closed the transaction on June 26 of the same month. Through this transaction, Taewoong Logistics has secured specialized personnel in air cargo transportation and a stable air logistics sales network, and has expanded its customer service area for air transportation.In connection with the transaction, we provided professional legal advisory services throughout the entire process of the transaction, from the signing of the Memorandum of Understanding to the legal due diligence of Transall, negotiation of the purchase price adjustment, preparation and review of the share purchase agreement, internal authorization procedures such as resolutions of the Board of Directors and the General Meeting of Shareholders, and post-closing disclosure and business combination filing.□ Attorneys in charge: Choi Jae-Woong, Han Tae-Young, Song Ye-Na, Kim June-Young, Park Hyun-Jin, and Lee Seong-Jun

The column, "Damages for interference to the quality of housing" written by Attorney Kwon Oh-Jun has been published on The Korea Herald. ㆍRelated article         [The Korea Herald][Housing Talk] Damages for interference to the quality of housing -2023. 9. 12.

The column, 'Requirements, support measures for jeonse fraud victims' written by Attorney Shim Jun-Seop has been published on The Korea Herald. ㆍRelated article         [The Korea Herald][Housing Talk] Requirements, support measures for jeonse fraud victims -2023. 8. 25.

The column, "Tenants' power to terminate jeonse leases, a blind spot for landlords" written by Attorney Kim Yong-Woo has been published on The Korea Herald. ㆍRelated article         [The Korea Herald][Housing Talk] Tenants' power to terminate jeonse leases, a blind spot for landlords -2023. 8. 1.

The column, "Don't lose legal dispute even before it starts" written by Attorney Kwon Oh-Jun has been published on The Korea Herald. ㆍRelated article         [The Korea Herald][Housing Talk] Don’t lose legal dispute even before it starts -2023. 7. 4.

The column, 'I have a new landlord. Can I ask the former landlord to return my deposit?' written by Attorney Shim Jun-Seop has been published on The Korea Herald. ㆍRelated article         [The Korea Herald][Housing Talk] I have a new landlord. Can I ask the former landlord to return my deposit? -2023. 6. 6.

Attorney Kim Kyung-Soo's column on "Matters to note when multiple parties assume ownership over land or building from a single party in a redevelopment project" has been published in The Segye Times.