Recognition and Enforcement of Foreign Judgments in South Korea

Posted on by

Let’s say you obtained damages recovery judgment from a U.S. court against a Korean in the states.  But soon after you got excited for the winning judgment, you found he has no assets in the states to fulfill your judgment.  This could also happen in a litigation between U.S. citizens in a U.S. court where the losing defendant moved to South Korea and there are no assets left in the U.S.  You might have spent quite large amount of legal fees to win the judgment already, but you think your judgment is now in great peril to be useless.  This horrible situation might frustrate you.

But, don’t worry too much.  You can enforce your duly obtained U.S judgment in Korea.  If you are sure the defendant has enough assets to cover your claims in the judgment and your legal fees, you can file for an enforcement order for foreign judgment to a Korean court.

According to Article 218 of Civil Procedure Act of South Korea, a final and conclusive judgement by a foreign court shall be recognized and enforceable in Korea, when all the following requirements are met:

  1. the foreign court which issued the judgment had a jurisdiction over the case consistent with the principles of jurisdiction under Korean law and relevant international treaty;
  2. the defeated party received, in a timely manner, a service of complaint and summons by lawful method excluding a service by public notice, or that she responded to the lawsuit Continue reading →

Chung & Partners Successfully Advised Korean Real Estate Developer on Project Financing For Acquisition and Development of Commercial Building in the amount of USD 140 Million

Posted on by

In September 2012, Chung & Partners successfully advised a Korean real estate development company(the “Company”) in connection with a project financing for the land acquisition, development and construction of commercial building to be built in downtown Seoul.  The financing package enabled our client to receive funds in the amount equivalent to USD 140,000,000.  Thanks to this transaction, the Company has successfully launched the project.

Our attorney Mr. Wonil Chung acted as counsel for the Company and provided legal advice on every aspect of the deal from structuring to documentation.

Legal Liability Relating to Termination of Marital Engagement under Korean Law

Posted on by

We have received questions regarding this issue quite often.  Actually our office had taken a civil case arising out of termination of marital engagement between Korean and non-Korean, and successfully defended our client from civil liability.  So we think it is a good time to look into what happens in this kind of legal dispute and its legal implication.

Firstly, it must be mentioned that, under Korean law, if a matrimonial engagement is duly made, no party can legally terminate or rescind the engagement without justifiable causes.  This, however, does not mean the engagement shall be enforced regardless of the objection from the other party once the engagement agreement was made.  Rather, it just means if one party terminates the engagement without cause, he or she is obliged to pay monetary compensation to the other.

Then what are  the “justifiable causes” to terminate the engagement?  The law sets forth justifiable causes as follows:

  1. If one of the parties has been sentenced to punishment of not less than suspension of qualification;
  2. If one of the parties has been adjudicated as incompetent or quasi-incompetent after Continue reading →

Attorney Wonil Chung Invited for Entertainment Law Practice Panel at the 20th Annual Conference of International Association of Korean Lawyers (IAKL)

Posted on by

Our attorney, Wonil Chung, Esq. was invited to speak on the entertainment law practice at the 20th Annual Conference of International Association of Korean Lawyers (IAKL), which was held from September 13 to 16, 2012.

At the conference session titled “K-POP & Entertainment Law”, Mr. Chung gave an English presentation in front of U.S. and Korean licensed lawyers and law school students on the various legal issues arising out of the Korean music business, so-called “K-POP” and introduced recent high-profile litigations involving famous K-POP artists such as TVXQ, KARA and big management companies such as SM Entertainment.

Mr. Wonil Chung, a Korean licensed lawyer, has extensive experience in advising and representing Korean and non-Korean clients on various issues involving Korean laws such as intellectual property, Continue reading →

Provisional Attachment of Assets under Korean Law – How to Secure Your Monetary Claim in Korea

Posted on by

Let’s assume a creditor has a monetary claim against a debtor in Korea but the debtor refuses to pay it.  The creditor would proceed to file a lawsuit to get a judgment to collect his claim.  Unfortunately, however, the chances are that, knowing the complaint was filed, the debtor would try to conceal or transfer his assets to evade from the judgment to be made later.  This shows why provisional attachment is highly required to secure the judgment to be obtained.

Provisional attachment is a judicial measure available to anyone who has a monetary claim to lock down certain assets to keep the debtor from selling or giving them away until the court issues a judgment on the merit. The creditor can, and usually does, seek a provisional remedy before she files a complaint on the merit.  So, this is a very powerful weapon for the creditor.  For example, as many Korean creditors do, if the creditor succeeds in putting a provisional attachment on the debtor’s bank account, the debtor would not be able to use the money and could face several penalties regarding its banking/financing transactions with the bank.  This could heavily deteriorate the ability for a small com­pany to con­duct business, which makes the debtor Continue reading →

Introduction to the Deportation or Removal Order and How to Appeal the Order in Korea

Posted on by

그림 2In South Korea, the immigration office may remove or deport from South Korea any person who breached the Immigration Control Act(“ICA”) of South Korea.  Any person who is released after receiving a sentence of imprisonment without prison labor or heavier punishment may be deported by the deportation order as well.

When the immigration officer reasonably finds a foreigner falls under the requirements for the deportation and she might run away, the officer can detain her with the approval from the head of immigration office.  The duration of detention cannot exceed 10 days, which can be renewed up to 10 more days.  During the detention, the officer interviews and decides whether to deport the individual or not.

When the immigration officer decides to deport a foreigner, the officer shall deliver the deportation order to the foreigner and immediately enforce him to leave South Korea.  But, when the individual files a claim for refugee protection, the deportation order cannot be executed until the refugee claim is decided by the Korean authority.

Then, how can you appeal the deportation order issued by the Korean immigration office?  There are two ways to stop the deportation.  First, Continue reading →

Supreme Court of Korea Ruled Music DRM Does Not Violate Competition Law – Abuse of Dominant Market Position in Mobile Phone and Music Download Service

Posted on by

There have been disputes as to whether Digital Rights Management(DRM) does violate competition law.  By using a DRM, the company can tie the playback of certain digital files to its own IT device.  The problem arises when the company has a dominant market position, because it entails an argument from competitors that the company has abused its dominant market position to distort a free competition at the market.

In November last year, the Supreme Court of Korea firstly issued a ruling addressing this issue.  The case dates back to 2006, when Fair Trade Commission(FTC) of South Korea ordered SK Telecom, the largest mobile carrier company and music download service provider, to lift up a DRM which had prevented the purchasers of MP3 mobile phone of SK Telecom from playing MP3 files downloaded from other online music store that SK Telecom does not operate.  SK Telecom had appealed the FTC’s decision to the court.

At the heart of this lawsuit lies the issue of whether SK Telecom’s use of DRM does constitute an abuse of its dominant market position under Korean Competition law.  In this regard, the Monopoly Regulation and Fair Trade Act(MRFTA) of Korea provides that any market dominant enterpriser shall not commit an act of either (i) unreasonably interfering with the business activities of other enterprisers or (ii) unreasonably doing considerable harm to the interests of consumers.  The FTC found SK Telecom’s using a DRM Continue reading →