One written channel
Claims, supporting documents, requested action and reply dates travel together. Contacting a researcher personally does not replace the designated channel.
SOURCE · EVIDENCE · COUNTERARGUMENT · PROCEDURE
RISCON Labs · Legal Research & Response Division
Answer on the record.Follow the issue through.
PRO SE studies how far a legal claim holds up against the evidence. Official texts, adverse facts and competing readings stay together. RISCON matters enter through a designated written channel and leave through an approved written response.
Review by separate AI roles
Source reading, adverse arguments, evidence and procedure are assigned distinct questions. The role instructions and model measurement results are published.
Approval before release
A draft, an approved response, a sent response and a court filing are separate states. Each requires its own record.
Follow-up stays open
Missing originals, unresolved discrepancies and newly emerged adverse facts stay on the review list. A change in grounds reopens the conclusion.
Selected work
The detail that changes the conclusion.
These are sustained readings of published decisions. The original, the evidentiary path and the limits of the conclusion remain visible.
01
Digital search: where the authority changes
Original device, forensic image, copies, transfer, search and a second warrant. Each movement of the data can change the procedural question.
Read the analysis02Handwriting: when corroboration runs in a circle
Independent evidence, a shared source, retrial and the facts that cut against a preferred conclusion.
Read the analysisA conclusion must carry its working record.
Read the holding alongside the issue, the disposition, the burden of proof and the conditions for reopening. Then inspect what the AI itself got wrong.
RISCON Labs
Built in practice. Tested in research.
RISCON Labs is assessed through publications anyone can check: a 1378-record decision ledger, a 114-volume legal series, Meridian's papers and research series, and publishing work across several research sites. It is led by a researcher with 28 years of practical experience.
Research institution and provenanceRISCON Legal Brief
Briefs on the questions decisions turn on, from crime, economic crime, insolvency and capital markets to public law, tax, labor, company, civil, family, military justice, competition and intellectual property.
Long-form reviews of the legal, procedural and evidential questions on which a decision turns. They read the law as it stood at the time of each act, separate the materials to be checked from the possible readings, and leave the judgment to the reader. They are research, not advice on any matter and not a submission to any court.
139 briefs · Newest first
Corporate rehabilitation ·
Where a seller retains ownership of goods until full payment, what is the seller's position in the buyer's bankruptcy, and can the buyer's assignment of its purchase-price claims to that seller be avoided? Decision 2022Da294084 on a right of separate exercise
In Decision 2022Da294084 (12 September 2024) the Supreme Court held that a seller who retained ownership of movables until full payment has a right of separate exercise, not a right of retrieval, in the buyer's bankruptcy; that a seller who authorised disposal loses, absent special circumstances, that right over the resulting purchase-price claims; and that assigning those claims to the seller is avoidable as a preferential act.
ReadLabor & industrial relations ·Is a construction-machinery rental company a 'third party' against whom the Korea Workers' Compensation and Welfare Service may take over a worker's claim? Supreme Court Judgment 2022Da214040 on sharing the risk of the workplace
In Judgment 2022Da214040 (22 January 2026, en banc), the Supreme Court read Article 87(1) of the Industrial Accident Compensation Insurance Act to mean that the range of persons against whom the Korea Workers' Compensation and Welfare Service may take over the injured worker's claim for damages turns on whether the wrongdoer and the worker shared the risk inherent in the business or workplace, not on who bears the insurance premiums.
ReadEconomic crime ·Can bitcoin be the 'property benefit' that fraud targets? Decision 2021Do9855 on bitcoin as a virtual asset
Bitcoin is a virtual asset that represents economic value digitally and can be transferred, stored and traded electronically, so it falls within the 'property benefit' that can be the object of fraud: that is the holding of Decision 2021Do9855 (11 November 2021). The Supreme Court found the other grounds of appeal without merit and dismissed every appeal.
ReadCustomary law & property rights ·Does an adult child whose surname and origin were changed to the mother's under Article 781(6) of the Civil Act automatically become a member of the mother's jongchung? Supreme Court Decision 2017Da260940 on sharing the common ancestor's surname and origin
Decision 2017Da260940 (26 May 2022) held that a jongchung, formed spontaneously to tend the common ancestor's tombs and hold ancestral rites, admits as members, regardless of sex, all descendants who share the common ancestor's surname and origin once they reach adulthood. An adult whose surname and origin were changed to the mother's under Article 781(6) is therefore automatically a member of the jongchung to which the mother belongs.
ReadTax & international taxation ·Who is the taxpayer for income from property held in another's name, and is payment for a patent registered only abroad Korean-source income? Decision 2016Du42883 on the substantial controller and the Korea–US tax treaty
Decision 2016Du42883 (27 December 2018) holds that where the nominal holder of property cannot control or manage it, another person in fact controls and manages it, and the divergence arises from a purpose of avoiding tax, the income from the property is treated as the substantial controller's, and the substantial controller is the taxpayer; absent a special provision excluding it, this principle applies equally to the interpretation and application of tax treaties, which have the same effect as statutes. It also holds that royalties for a patent registered only abroad are not Korean-source income under the Korea–US tax treaty.
ReadLabor & industrial relations ·Must a wage creditor demand distribution by the deadline to be paid first, and which wages count? Decision 2015Da204762 on 'the final three months' wages' and 'the final three years' retirement pay'
Article 38(2) of the Labor Standards Act and the former Employee Retirement Benefit Security Act, as Decision 2015Da204762 read them, give the final three months' wages, workers' compensation and the final three years' retirement pay priority over secured claims, but the creditor must demand distribution by the deadline to be paid first. The periods are counted back from the end of employment or from the date of the demand; the grounds for retirement pay must have arisen before the deadline; and a mortgagee need only show, before the distribution table is fixed, that its secured claim is a wage claim with priority.
ReadEconomic crime ·What is the 'gain' and how many fraud offences arise when several victims are deceived? Decision 2014Do16980 on the gain under Article 3 and offences counted by victim
Decision 2014Do16980 (23 April 2015) holds that the 'gain' under Article 3 of the Act on the Aggravated Punishment, etc. of Specific Economic Crimes means the gain of a single offence or of a comprehensive single offence, not the sum of gains of offences punishable as concurrent crimes. Deceiving several victims separately constitutes a separate fraud for each victim, and where the gains are obtained by a single act, the offences stand in ideal concurrence.
ReadCompetition & fair trade ·When may a supplier lawfully maintain minimum resale prices, and when does restricting dealers' sales outlets harm fair trade? Decision 2010Du9976 on 'justifiable reason' and the restriction of trading partners
Decision 2010Du9976 (10 March 2011) reads Article 29(1) of the Monopoly Regulation and Fair Trade Act to permit minimum resale price maintenance exceptionally where there is a justifiable reason, such as promoting inter-brand competition and thereby increasing consumer welfare, with the burden of proof on the business operator. Whether a restriction of trading partners is likely to harm fair trade must be judged against the same background, so the court below should have decided the two questions together.
ReadCriminal & investigative procedure ·May a bribery conviction rest on the giver's statement alone, believing only the parts that fit the indictment? Decision 2010Do14487 on proving 'all of the concrete facts charged' beyond reasonable doubt
Article 307 of the Criminal Procedure Act requires the facts of a crime to be proved beyond reasonable doubt, and Decision 2010Do14487 holds that this strict proof covers every concrete fact charged. Where the alleged recipient of a bribe denies receipt and there is no objective evidence, Decision 2010Do14487 holds, conviction on the giver's testimony alone requires that testimony to be credible to that degree, judged as a whole and not by selecting the parts that fit the indictment.
ReadViolent & serious crime ·When must a doctor honour a patient's refusal of a blood transfusion? Decision 2009Do14407 on self-determination of a value equal to life
Where surgery is performed on the premise of an express refusal of transfusion and an emergency arises in which life is endangered without transfusion, the doctor must in principle consider transfusion, but must also weigh the patient's self-determination where it has a value equal to life, which presupposes full explanation, unflawed decision-making and reconfirmation.
ReadCompetition & fair trade ·When may a business set a minimum resale price, and which sales figure is the fine based on? Decision 2008Du22815 on 'a justifiable reason' and 'related sales amount'
Decision 2008Du22815 upheld treating the many payments and other support that a pharmaceutical company gave to medical institutions and others as a single, comprehensive act of unfairly inducing customers, and upheld calculating the fine on the total sales of the affected products. It also held that minimum resale price maintenance is permitted by way of exception where there is a justifiable reason, and that the business operator bears the burden of proving that reason.
ReadCivil procedure & enforcement ·To what degree must a fact be proved in a civil case? Decision 2008Da6755 on the degree of proof of a fact
Under Article 288 of the Civil Procedure Act and the authorities cited in Decision 2008Da6755 (28 October 2010), proving a fact in civil litigation is not a matter of proof in the natural-science sense but of proving a high degree of probability, to the point where an ordinary person would have no doubt. In that fire case, a suspicion that there was a considerable possibility the fire started from a cigarette was not by itself enough to establish that it was caused by cigarettes smoked by the defendant's employees.
ReadConstitutional, administrative & state liability ·When may a court set aside a punitive administrative disposition for abuse of discretion? Decision 2007Du6946 on 'the bounds of discretion' in a pharmacist's fine
Decision 2007Du6946 (20 September 2007) held that whether a punitive administrative disposition exceeds or abuses discretion is judged by objectively weighing the harm to the public interest against the disadvantage the individual would suffer from the disposition. Where the standard for such dispositions is set in the form of a ministerial decree, a court should not lightly find that discretion was exceeded or abused unless there is a reasonable ground for regarding the standard itself as incompatible with the Constitution or an Act, or a disposition made under it as manifestly unfair.
ReadConstitutional, administrative & state liability ·When is aircraft noise from a military airfield unlawful, and what does moving into a noise zone change? Supreme Court Decision 2007Da74560 on the 'defect in installation or management' and the tolerable limit
Decision 2007Da74560 (25 November 2010) holds that damage from aircraft noise around Daegu airfield at a level of 85WECPNL or above exceeded the limit to be tolerated in ordinary social life and was unlawful, that a noise appraisal made under oath or commissioned by the court may not lightly be rejected, and that moving into a known noise area may be a ground for exempting the wrongdoer from liability or for reducing damages.
ReadEconomic crime ·When does silence in a transaction amount to fraud? Supreme Court Decision 2005Do5774 on 'deception' and the duty to disclose
Decision 2005Do5774 (28 October 2005) restates that 'deception' covers every act breaching the good faith owed in a property transaction, including silence on a matter the counterparty should have been told. It also confirms that a sales organisation's failure to disclose its financial position and the source of the commissions it promised supports convictions for fraud and habitual fraud.
ReadCorporate rehabilitation ·From what day does the 15-day period run for avoiding an act needed to assert a right against third parties? Supreme Court Decision 2003Da53497 on 'the day the effect of the causal act takes place'
Article 80(1) of the Company Reorganisation Act provides that, after a suspension of payments or a petition for bankruptcy, composition or reorganisation proceedings, an act needed to assert a right against third parties may be avoided if it was done in bad faith more than 15 days after the right was created, transferred or changed. Decision 2003Da53497 (12 February 2004) holds that the 15 days run from the day the effect of the causal act takes place, not from the day the causal act was done.
ReadCorporate rehabilitation ·When is providing security 'an act belonging to the bankrupt's duty', so that it escapes avoidance? Decision 2001Da55116 on a concrete duty to give security
Decision 2001Da55116 (8 February 2002) holds that 'belonging to the bankrupt's duty' in Article 64(4) of the former Bankruptcy Act requires a concrete obligation whose performance the creditor has a right to demand, and that a general, abstract duty to provide security on request is not enough. The pledge granted in this case was therefore avoidable, and a set-off using the federation's obligation to return deposits as the passive claim was not permitted.
ReadCapital markets & finance ·Can someone who merely passes on money be a co-perpetrator of the offence of taking money for brokering, and what makes matched trading market manipulation? Supreme Court Decision 98Do3051 on 'co-perpetration' and 'the unlawful purpose'
Under Decision 98Do3051 (8 December 1998), a third party who is not a party to the brokering and merely passes on the money paid for it does not thereby commit the offence of taking money for brokering; but if that person passes it on with joint intent shared with a party, the passing is participation in carrying out the offence, and the person is liable as a co-perpetrator. Matched trading requires an unlawful purpose, and the stabilisation exception is narrow.
ReadCapital markets & finance ·What counts as information that may significantly affect an investor's investment judgment, and is a trade made before the ministerial decree was enacted still a breach? Supreme Court Decision 93Do695 on 'information that may have a significant impact on investors' investment judgment'
Article 188-2 of the Securities Exchange Act, as Decision 93Do695 (26 April 1994) read it, covers information that a reasonable investor would consider important in deciding on a securities trade, comparing its significance with the probability of the fact occurring; the information need not be objectively clear and certain, and use of information never disclosed in any way breaches Article 188-2(1) even before the ministry decree.
ReadCorporate rehabilitation ·Is a tax assessment lawful when a tax claim goes unlisted before the rehabilitation plan is approved? Supreme Court Decision 2025Du33118 on 'the tax obligation itself survives'
Under Articles 118(1) and 251 of the Debtor Rehabilitation and Bankruptcy Act, Decision 2025Du33118 (8 May 2026) holds that the mere fact that a tax claim was not entered in the list of creditors or filed before the plan was approved does not extinguish the taxing authority's power to assess it before then. An assessment made in that period is therefore lawful, and the later decision approving the plan does not alter its effect.
ReadCorporate rehabilitation ·Does Korean law govern the trustee's avoidance of a transfer with foreign elements, and do the debtor's overseas assets belong to the bankruptcy estate? Decision 2025Da210676 on the insolvency law of the forum and 'property not subject to seizure'
The Debtor Rehabilitation and Bankruptcy Act, as Decision 2025Da210676 (18 July 2025) read it, governs the trustee's avoidance even where the act has foreign elements, absent special circumstances, and the debtor's overseas assets belong to the estate in principle. Neither the asset's location abroad nor an obstacle to compulsory execution under foreign law makes it 'property not subject to seizure'.
ReadCriminal & investigative procedure ·Does a warrant naming computers and storage media reach information stored on a mobile phone? Supreme Court Decision 2024Mo2020 on strict construction of 'items to be seized'
The words a judge uses to specify 'the items to be seized' in a warrant for seizure and search must be read strictly and cannot be expanded or construed by analogy against the person subject to seizure. Unless special circumstances exist, a warrant whose items to be seized do not cover electronic information stored on a mobile phone cannot be used to seize that information.
ReadCivil procedure & enforcement ·Do attorney's fees agreed to be paid later, or paid by a third party, count as litigation costs? Decision 2019Ma6990 on fees the party 'paid or is to pay'
Article 109(1) of the Civil Procedure Act and Article 3(1) of the Rule on Inclusion of Attorney's Fees in Litigation Costs treat the fees that the party has paid or is to pay as litigation costs. Decision 2019Ma6990 holds that this includes fees the party agreed to pay afterwards, and fees paid by a third party where the circumstances are the same as if the party had paid them.
ReadCivil procedure & enforcement ·What must an applicant show to obtain litigation aid when defeat is said to be obvious? Decision 2018Mu635 on 'not obviously bound to lose'
Article 128(1) of the Civil Procedure Act, applied to administrative litigation through Article 8(2) of the Administrative Litigation Act, requires the applicant to lack funds for litigation costs and not to be obviously bound to lose. Decision 2018Mu635 (16 August 2018) held that losing at first instance alone does not make defeat obvious on appeal, and set aside the order below.
ReadViolent & serious crime ·When a judge mitigates a prison term on optional grounds, must both limits be halved? Supreme Court Decision 2018Do5475 on 'optional mitigation'
The decision holds that, under Article 55(1)3 of the Criminal Act, once optional grounds for mitigation are found and the judge applies statutory mitigation to a prison term, both the maximum and the minimum must be halved, and that the current reading of optional mitigation, under which the judge may choose whether or not to mitigate, remains valid.
ReadCapital markets & finance ·What must be proved before a person is convicted as a co-perpetrator? Decision 2018Do20415 on joint criminal intent and functional control of the act
Article 30 of the Criminal Act requires joint criminal intent and functional control of the offence through joint decision-making. Decision 2018Do20415 (21 December 2023) holds that recognising and tolerating another's act is not enough, and that the mutual-use relationship must be proved beyond reasonable doubt; otherwise the accused must be acquitted.
ReadCivil procedure & enforcement ·How are costs divided when both sides appeal and both appeals fail? Decision 2018Da271657 on a marked difference in the ranges contested
In Decision 2018Da271657 (3 April 2019) the Supreme Court held that where a judgment granting part of a claim is met with appeals by both sides and both appeals are dismissed, a marked difference in the ranges contested must not be ignored: the court should order each appellant to bear the costs of its own appeal, or apportion the combined costs in proportion to those ranges.
ReadCivil obligations & remedies ·When does the three-year limitation period begin against an employer? Decision 2018Da241403 on knowing 'the damage and the person who caused it'
Under Article 766(1) of the Civil Act, the short limitation period runs from the day the injured party actually and concretely learned the elements of the tort and, in a claim against an employer under Article 756, from the day the injured party also knew of the employer, the employment relationship and facts from which it can be judged that the act was done in connection with the employer's business.
ReadTax & international taxation ·How is the market price of a real estate lease set when a business leases property to a related party at an unduly low rent, and when does a failure to file a return count as 'fraud or other wrongful act'? — Decision 2017Du69977
Decision 2017Du69977 (8 July 2021) holds that the market price of a real estate leasing service is the price continuously charged to unrelated persons in similar circumstances, or the price generally charged between third parties, and that only where no such price exists or the market price is unclear is it an amount calculated as the law prescribes. It also holds that, absent special circumstances, creating the appearance of a share sale or similar transaction under a nominee trust is not 'fraud or other wrongful act'.
ReadLabor & industrial relations ·Who must prove that work and injury are not adequately linked? Decision 2017Du45933 on the burden of proving adequate causation
Article 37(1) of the former Industrial Accident Compensation Insurance Act, added by the 2007 amendment, does not allocate or shift to the Korea Workers' Compensation Service the burden of proving adequate causation between work and injury; that burden remains with the worker who claims an occupational accident, so the established case law stands.
ReadIP, data & telecommunications ·Can posting links to infringing videos count as aiding a public communication right infringement? Supreme Court Decision 2017Do19025 on 'commercial and continuous' linking
Decision 2017Do19025 (9 September 2021, en banc) held that linking is not itself a transmission, but that a person who knows the linked content is an infringing post and links to it commercially and continuously, so that the public can easily reach it, aids the principal offender's infringement of the right of public communication. It overruled Decision 2012Do13748 to that extent.
ReadCriminal & investigative procedure ·When is a search of a suspect's messages held on an internet service provider's server unlawful enough to be cancelled? Decision 2016Mo587 (31 May 2022) on grave unlawfulness in the search procedure
Decision 2016Mo587 (31 May 2022) holds that defects in a search and seizure under warrant of a suspect's KakaoTalk messages stored on an internet service provider's server can, taken together, be grave enough to make the whole procedure unlawful, so that the search and seizure may be quashed. The Supreme Court upheld the quashing in a case where the original warrant was not presented, relevant data were not selected, the right to participate was not afforded and no inventory was delivered.
ReadLabor & industrial relations ·Are workers of an in-house subcontractor among the 'workers engaged in a major defence contractor' who may not strike? Decision 2016Do3185 on Article 41(2) of the Trade Union and Labour Relations Adjustment Act
Article 41(2) of the Trade Union and Labour Relations Adjustment Act bars certain workers of designated major defence contractors from industrial action. Decision 2016Do3185 (18 July 2017) held, on strict construction of a penal provision, that workers of an in-house subcontractor producing defence materiel at the designated company's site are not covered, and affirmed the acquittal below.
ReadLabor & industrial relations ·Is a clause promising a job to the family of a worker killed in an industrial accident void as against public morals? Decision 2016Da248998 and the 'special circumstances' that override a collective agreement
Article 103 of the Civil Act, applied in Decision 2016Da248998 (27 August 2020, full bench): a collective agreement is not exempt from Article 103, but courts should intervene cautiously, and a clause promising special hiring of a deceased member's family cannot be held void unless special circumstances exist, such as an excessive restriction of the employer's freedom to hire or a marked impairment of the fairness of hiring opportunities.
ReadConstitutional, administrative & state liability ·Must an agency give prior notice and a chance to respond before a disposition that restricts rights, and when do civil service personnel dispositions fall outside the Administrative Procedures Act? Decision 2011Du30687 on the exclusion for 'dispositions under public service personnel relations statutes'
Under the former Administrative Procedures Act, an agency making a disposition that imposes an obligation or restricts rights must, unless an exception applies, give prior notice and an opportunity to submit opinions; a disposition made without them is unlawful. Decision 2011Du30687 holds that the exclusion for 'dispositions under public service personnel relations statutes' applies only to dispositions that by their nature make administrative procedure difficult or unnecessary, or that are subject to an equivalent procedure.
ReadConstitutional, administrative & state liability ·May a public agency withhold statements in an investigative record as information about personal matters? Supreme Court Decision 2011Du2361 (Full Bench) on 'the secrecy or freedom of private life'
Reading Article 9(1)(6) of the Public Agency Information Disclosure Act, the Full Bench in Decision 2011Du2361 (18 June 2012) held that non-disclosable information is not limited to identifying particulars but also covers other personal matters whose disclosure would reveal intimate secrets and would risk disrupting the person's personal and mental inner life or preventing the person from leading a free private life. It affirmed the ruling below.
ReadViolent & serious crime ·When can a company be punished for its employee's violation under the dual-punishment clause of the former Road Act? Decision 2009Do5824 on 'due care or supervision'
Under the former Road Act's dual-punishment clause, a corporation is punishable only if it neglected due care or supervision in connection with the business in which the violation occurred, judged in light of all the circumstances. Decision 2009Do5824 set aside a judgment that punished the company solely because its driver committed the offence.
ReadIP, data & telecommunications ·Must a source statement always name the author? Decision 2007Do2202 on 'the real name or pen name must be stated'
The former Copyright Act required the source of a work used to be stated in a manner reasonable in the circumstances of the use, and added that where the work bore the author's real name or pen name, that name was to be stated. Decision 2007Do2202 (29 April 2010) holds that this second clause is only an example of how to state a source, not an absolute command.
ReadCivil obligations & remedies ·Who answers for a stem cell transplant done without approval, and what must be explained first? Supreme Court Decision 2007Da3162 on drugs, clinical trials and the duty to explain
Decision 2007Da3162 (14 October 2010) held that mesenchymal stem cells cultured in vitro and administered in cell units to treat disease are drugs under the former Pharmaceutical Affairs Act, that transplanting them into humans is a clinical trial requiring approval from the head of the Korea Food and Drug Administration, and that performing the procedure without approval is not in itself a tort, but that giving false information about its effect breached the duties to explain and to notify.
ReadConstitutional, administrative & state liability ·Who may sue to invalidate a public waters reclamation licence and a project approval? Supreme Court Decision 2006Du330 on 'an interest protected by law'
Reading Article 35 of the Administrative Litigation Act in Decision 2006Du330 (16 March 2006), the Supreme Court held that a third party may sue for confirmation that a disposition is void only where an individual, direct and concrete interest protected by the governing or related statutes is infringed. Residents inside the environmental impact assessment area are presumed to have such an interest; residents outside it must prove environmental harm beyond the tolerable limit.
ReadCorporate rehabilitation ·When is a provision of collateral 'an act belonging to the company's obligations' for avoidance under the former Company Reorganization Act? Decision 2004Da32503 and the meaning of 'company's obligations'
In Decision 2004Da32503 (29 June 2006), the Supreme Court read the phrase 'an act belonging to the company's obligations' in Article 78(1)(3) of the former Company Reorganization Act as requiring a concrete obligation whose performance the creditor may demand; collateral given in substance to obtain an extension of a matured bill or to avoid dishonour is not such an act. The appeal was dismissed.
ReadCapital markets & finance ·When does a disclosure count as 'spreading false facts'? Decision 2003Do686 and the test of whether the disclosed content itself is false
Under Article 188-4(4) of the former Securities and Exchange Act as Decision 2003Do686 (14 November 2003) read it, whether a person spread false facts is judged by whether the disclosed content itself is false, not by whether that person had the will or the ability actually to carry out what was disclosed. The disclosure of a shareholders' resolution amending the articles that had actually been passed was therefore not the spreading of false facts.
ReadCapital markets & finance ·When does buying shares amount to market manipulation? Supreme Court Decision 99Do2282 on 'the purpose of inducing trading'
In Decision 99Do2282 (26 June 2001), the Supreme Court read Article 188-4(2)(1) of the Securities Exchange Act as follows: 'the purpose of inducing trading' means drawing investors into trading by making an artificially moved price appear to be the natural result of supply and demand, and whether trades fall within the prohibition is judged on all the listed circumstances of the security and the market.
ReadCriminal & investigative procedure ·How far may police seize electronic information from a phone handed over voluntarily? Supreme Court Decision 2016Do9596 on the scope of seizure and the suspect's participation
In Decision 2016Do9596 (13 January 2022), the Supreme Court read Articles 218 and 219 of the Criminal Procedure Act as follows. Where the scope the submitter intended is unclear, seizure of voluntarily submitted electronic information extends only to information that is connected with the suspected offence that prompted the submission and has at least minimal value in proving it. Where a medium, or a copy of it, containing both seizable and other information is handed over and taken to the office to be searched, copied and printed, doing so without giving an opportunity to participate and without delivering a seizure list is in principle unlawful.
ReadCorporate rehabilitation ·When is a debtor in 'suspension of payment' so that a gratuitous act can be avoided? Supreme Court Decision 2006Da80636 on 'suspension of payment'
In Decision 2006Da80636 (24 August 2007), the Supreme Court read Article 64(5) of the former Bankruptcy Act as follows. 'Suspension of payment' means an express or implied outward indication that the debtor, for lack of means, is generally and continuously unable to pay debts as they fall due. Once approval of a composition becomes final, the earlier suspension or equivalent crisis may be regarded as provisionally resolved; where payments are then made under the composition terms before new circumstances or a new crisis lead to revocation and bankruptcy, only a suspension or equivalent crisis that is adequately causally connected to that bankruptcy counts.
ReadCivil procedure & enforcement ·When may a court reject only part of an expert appraisal and choose among conflicting appraisals? Supreme Court Decision 2022Da212273 on the probative force of appraisal results
In Decision 2022Da212273 (14 July 2022), the Supreme Court restated that an appraisal must be respected unless its method or a similar aspect contains a marked error; that a court may reject only the erroneous part and use the rest as evidence unless the error renders the results as a whole contradictory or very unclear; and that, faced with conflicting appraisals, a court may follow one or combine several within the rules of experience and logic.
ReadCorporate rehabilitation ·May a rehabilitation creditor join as an auxiliary participant after the trustee continues the creditor's revocation action as an avoidance action? Supreme Court Decision 2021Ma6702 on 'an interest in the outcome of the litigation'
Article 71 of the Civil Procedure Act lets a third party with an interest in the outcome of a case take part to help one side. Decision 2021Ma6702 (10 December 2021) holds that where rehabilitation proceedings open while a rehabilitation creditor's revocation action is pending and the trustee continues it as an avoidance action, that creditor has such an interest and may in principle take part, absent special circumstances.
ReadLabor & industrial relations ·Can a worker still ask the court to confirm employee status once the retirement age has passed? Supreme Court Decision 2021Da229588 on 'confirmation interest'
In an action for declaratory judgment, 'confirmation interest' exists only where a declaration is the most effective and appropriate way to remove a present anxiety or risk affecting a party's rights or legal position. Decision 2021Da229588 (27 April 2023) held, of its own motion, that a worker's claim for a declaration of employee status lost that interest when he reached retirement age while the appeal was pending.
ReadConstitutional, administrative & state liability ·Can a listed company sue over the regulator's notice that short-term trading profits occurred? Supreme Court Decision 2020Du44930 on 'the notification of the occurrence of short-term trading profits'
In Decision 2020Du44930 (19 August 2022), the Supreme Court read Article 2(1)(1) of the Administrative Litigation Act to mean that a notice under Article 172(3) of the Capital Markets Act that short-swing profits have occurred is a disposition subject to an appeal action, because it gives rise to the listed company's disclosure duty and there is no other judicial route to contest that duty.
ReadCapital markets & finance ·Does recommending shares on television without disclosing one's own holding amount to unfair means? Supreme Court Decision 2018Do13864 on 'unfair means, scheme or artifice' and 'the use of a deceitful device'
In Decision 2018Do13864 (26 May 2022), the Supreme Court read Article 178(1)(i) and (2) of the Capital Markets Act to mean that an adviser, analyst, media worker or website operator who, without disclosing his interest, recommends buying a security he has bought in advance and may sell after the recommendation uses both an unfair means, scheme or artifice and a deceitful device.
ReadConstitutional, administrative & state liability ·When a statute is wholly amended, does its old transitional rule still apply? Supreme Court Decision 2017Du74320 on 'special circumstances' and a serious public interest need
Decision 2017Du74320 (31 October 2019) holds that a transitional rule in the supplementary provisions of a statute lapses in principle when the statute is wholly amended, unless 'special circumstances' show it should continue, and that a building authority may refuse to accept a building report where a serious public interest need requires that the building not be allowed.
ReadEconomic crime ·Does money repaid as advance interest or fees reduce the sum defrauded? Supreme Court Decision 2017Do10601 on 'the whole of the property delivered'
Under Article 347(1) of the Criminal Act, delivery of property obtained by deception is itself the injury to the victim's property and the offence is complete on delivery. Where part of the price is handed back as advance interest, fees or the like, the sum defrauded is the whole of the property delivered by the victim, not that value less the amount returned.
ReadCriminal & investigative procedure ·Can a thing taken without a warrant from someone who does not own, possess or keep it be used against the accused? Supreme Court Decision 2009Do10092 on the 'seized item' and the 'photograph of the seized item'
Article 218 of the Criminal Procedure Act permits a warrantless seizure of a thing voluntarily submitted by its owner, possessor or custodian. Decision 2009Do10092 (28 January 2010) holds that a thing taken without a warrant in breach of that provision, and a photograph of it, cannot be used to prove guilt, and that the accused's or counsel's consent to its use as evidence makes no difference.
ReadCorporate rehabilitation ·Can a pledgee's own realisation of pledged property be avoided after rehabilitation begins? Supreme Court Decision 2009Da76362 on 'acts of execution' under Article 104
Decision 2009Da76362 (24 November 2011) reads Article 104 of the Debtor Rehabilitation and Bankruptcy Act to mean that an act of execution may be avoided under Article 100(1)(ii) without any special circumstance that would equate it with an act of the debtor, and that, by analogy, the same applies where a pledgee takes the pledged property itself.
ReadCapital markets & finance ·When does unpublished price-sensitive information come into existence? Supreme Court Decision 2008Do9623 on information that may have a material impact on an investor's judgement
Under former Article 188-2(1) and (2) of the Securities and Exchange Act, as the Supreme Court read them in Decision 2008Do9623 (26 November 2009), important information exists once it has concretised to the point where a reasonable investor would weigh its materiality and the likelihood of the fact occurring and find it of value in deciding on a securities trade — not only once it is objectively complete.
ReadCapital markets & finance ·Who must return short-swing trading profits: whose trade counts as the insider's? Supreme Court Decision 2007Da24459 on being the direct subject of the trade
In Decision 2007Da24459 (30 November 2007), the Court held under Article 188(2) of the Securities and Exchange Act that an insider can be ordered to return short-swing profits only if the insider was the direct subject of the trade, or if the subject's act can be identified with the insider's own act, and it upheld a finding of identity where the insider was the real owner of a nominee account.
ReadCriminal & investigative procedure ·When may an appeal court overturn the trial court's credibility finding on a witness? Supreme Court Decision 2006Do4994 on 'substantive immediacy'
Article 308 of the Criminal Procedure Act leaves the probative force of evidence to the judge's free judgment, but Decision 2006Do4994 (24 November 2006) holds that an appeal court must not reverse the trial court's credibility finding merely because its own view differs. Where the testimony supports the charge and the trial court rejected it after observing the witness, reversal requires 'sufficient and convincing marked circumstances'.
ReadCorporate rehabilitation ·Does a suit to avoid a disposal end when the reorganization proceedings close? Supreme Court Decision 2005Da59307 on the avoidance right being extinguished
Article 78 of the former Company Reorganization Act gave the receiver a right to avoid improper disposals of the company's property, exercisable only while reorganization proceedings are pending. Decision 2005Da59307 (12 October 2006) holds that the avoidance right is extinguished when the proceedings end. Where they end before the property is restored to the company, the claims for its return or for repayment of its value are also extinguished; and if the decision concluding the proceedings becomes final while an avoidance suit is pending, the rights in suit are extinguished absolutely, the suit ends, and no one may succeed to it.
ReadCivil obligations & remedies ·Can publication be banned before it harms reputation? Supreme Court Decision 2003Ma1477 and the 'strict and clear conditions' for prior restraint
Article 751 and Article 764 of the Civil Act do not exhaust the remedies for unlawful injury to reputation: Decision 2003Ma1477 (17 January 2005) holds that the victim may also seek an injunction excluding a present infringement or prohibiting a future one, but that banning the publication or sale of printed matter is prior restraint, allowed only under strict and clear substantive and procedural conditions.
ReadCivil obligations & remedies ·Can a pledgee of a trustee's expense-reimbursement claim sell the trust property itself? Supreme Court Decision 2003Da55059 on 'the trustee's expense-reimbursement claim'
Decision 2003Da55059 (22 December 2005) holds that the trustee's claim for reimbursement of expenses under Article 42 of the Trust Act is a right the trustee holds personally and independently, so it may be assigned and may be the object of a pledge of rights; but the self-help sale of trust property rests on the trustee's own position, and a pledgee cannot exercise it directly.
ReadEconomic crime ·When does money a National Assembly member receives become a bribe? Supreme Court Decision 97Do2609 on an overall quid pro quo relationship with legislative activity
Reading Article 129(1) of the Criminal Act, Decision 97Do2609 (26 December 1997) held that bribery is established where a public official's receipt of money stands in an overall and comprehensive quid pro quo relationship with the official's duties, so that neither a particular request nor a particular official act need be shown, and that money given as political funds keeps its character as a bribe when it is in substance such a quid pro quo.
ReadCriminal & investigative procedure ·How Far Can Dispositions of Investigative Agencies Be Challenged by Quasi-Appeal? Specifying the Object of Challenge, the Claim for Return of Seized Items after a Waiver Undertaking, Refusal of Counsel's Participation, and Presentation of Warrants
A quasi-appeal is an expedited remedy through which a court exercises ex post control over dispositions of investigative agencies concerning detention, seizure, the return of seized items, and the like. This brief examines four decisions to show how quasi-appeal proceedings have dealt with three matters: how specifically the object of challenge must be identified, the continued retention of seized items after the person concerned has been made to waive the claim for their return, and defects consisting in the refusal of counsel's participation and in the presentation of warrants.
ReadCorporate rehabilitation ·Where Does a Creditor's Revocation Action Go Once Bankruptcy or Individual Rehabilitation Begins? The Bar on Suits by Individual Creditors, the Trustee's Taking Over of the Suit and Amendment to an Action for Avoidance, Jurisdiction, and the Exclusion Period
Once a declaration of bankruptcy or a decision to commence individual rehabilitation procedures is made against a debtor, an individual creditor's right of revocation is absorbed into the right of avoidance exercised in the collective proceedings. This brief reads four judgments on four questions: what becomes of an action newly filed after commencement; the taking over and amendment of the claim in an action already pending; the competent court; and the reference point for the exclusion period.
ReadCapital markets & finance ·What Must Be Cleared First to Bring Securities Losses in a Single Action: Certification Requirements for a Securities-Related Class Action, the Scope of the Class, and Reconstitution of the Representative Parties
A securities-related class action must receive the court's certification before the merits are heard. What must be shown prima facie at that stage, and how far the court examines the case, determine whether the case can proceed at all. This brief reads three decisions, taking each in turn, on the scope of the court's determination of the certification requirements, the method of defining the class, and the handling of defects in a representative party.
ReadConstitutional, administrative & state liability ·Do Tables of Sanction Criteria Bind the Courts: Maximum Limits in the Appended Tables of Enforcement Decrees, the Internal-Guideline Character of Disposition Criteria in Ministerial Ordinances, and Public Notices That Departed from the Form of Delegation
This brief reads the holdings and summaries of three Supreme Court judgments, taking each in turn. It examines how, when sanctions such as surcharges and business suspensions are challenged, the form in which the disposition criteria are set out (Presidential Decree, Ministerial Ordinance or public notice) changes the manner of judicial review. It also sets out the cases in which criteria lose effect because their form does not match the manner of delegation, and the cases in which discretionary review remains even for a disposition that conforms to the criteria.
ReadTax & international taxation ·What Must Collapse for a Tax Assessment to Collapse with It: An Improper Purpose in a Tax Audit, Taxation Criteria in the Form of Directives, and a Decision of Limited Unconstitutionality on a Delegating Provision
This brief divides the routes for challenging the validity of a tax assessment into two axes. The procedural axis asks whether the tax audit departed from its proper purpose. The normative axis asks whether the directives and enforcement decrees on which the taxation was based have external binding effect. The brief reads both through the holdings and summaries of three Supreme Court judgments. It also sets out how two questions were contested in turn with respect to the same enforcement decree provision: whether administrative rules have the character of legal norms, and what binding force a decision of limited unconstitutionality carries.
ReadConstitutional, administrative & state liability ·What Must a Public Institution Prove to Refuse Disclosure of Information: Specific Proof of Grounds for Non-Disclosure, Impairment of Fairness by Disclosure of Meeting Minutes, and the Manifest Nature of an Abuse of Rights
This brief reads the holdings and summaries of three Supreme Court judgments, taking each in turn. It examines who must prove the grounds for non-disclosure, and to what degree, in litigation challenging a refusal to disclose information, and by what standards materials such as meeting minutes and investigation records are screened. It also considers how far the grounds for refusal may be changed during litigation, and the narrow exception under which the request itself is barred as an abuse of rights.
ReadViolent & serious crime ·What Becomes of the Judgment When a Penal Provision Is Changed or Loses Effect: Changes in Law under Article 1(2) of the Criminal Act and the Retroactive Effect of Decisions of Nonconformity with the Constitution on Penal Provisions
This brief examines, within the scope of the holdings of two en banc judgments, when Article 1(2) of the Criminal Act and Article 326, subparagraph 4 of the Criminal Procedure Act apply where a penal statute, or a law delegated under it, changes after the offence. It also examines whether a court must render an acquittal or an acquittal on procedural grounds (myeonso) where the Constitutional Court has declared a penal provision nonconforming to the Constitution and no remedial legislation has followed. It further sets out the abandonment of the reflective-consideration standard, the expiry of a fixed period of validity, and the divergent separate opinions on limiting retroactive effect.
ReadLabor & industrial relations ·Whose Business Does a Person Working at the Principal Contractor's Site Belong To? The Determination of Worker Dispatch, the Scope of the Ban on Industrial Action in the Defence Industry, and the Third Party in Industrial Accident Insurance Recourse
A person may work at another company's site under a service, in-house subcontracting or equipment-lease contract. This brief examines, within the scope of the summaries of the judgments, which business that person legally belongs to in three settings: the determination of worker dispatch under the Dispatched Workers Act, the scope of application of Article 41(2) of the Trade Union and Labor Relations Adjustment Act, and the interpretation of "third party" under Article 87(1) of the Industrial Accident Compensation Insurance Act. It sets out where the same labour at the same site is grouped differently according to the purpose of each statute, and the materials to be checked.
ReadCorporate law & governance ·Are the Time Limits and Record Dates for Exercising Shareholder Rights Read Only by Their Wording? The Reasonable Period after Permission to Convene, the Document for Proxy Voting, and the Reference Date for the Share Purchase Price
This brief sets out, within the scope of the summaries of three rulings, how the courts read the periods, documents and reference dates prescribed by law in light of the purpose of each scheme, in the contexts of court permission for minority shareholders to convene a general meeting, proxy voting and non-uniform exercise of voting rights, and the calculation of the share purchase price for shareholders dissenting from a merger. It focuses on the materials needed to identify where a reading that adheres to the wording diverges from a reading that supplements it by reference to purpose.
ReadCivil obligations & remedies ·How Is Damage from Pollution and Contaminated Blood Products Proved? Prima Facie Proof of Causation, the Weight of Expert Appraisal Results, the Tolerance Limit and Approach to Danger
This brief examines, within the scope of the summaries of three judgments, how far a victim must prove causation in pollution litigation and in litigation over infection from blood products before the burden of counter-proof shifts to the wrongdoer, and in what circumstances the results of an expert appraisal may be rejected. It also sets out how the tolerance limit and approach to danger bear on unlawfulness and on the amount of damages.
ReadCompetition & fair trade ·Who Bears the Burden of Proof in Fair Trade Cases? Justifiable Reasons for Resale Price Maintenance, Relevant Turnover, and Causation of Damage from Unfair Advertising
This brief reads separately, within the scope of the summaries of two judgments, the justifiable reasons for minimum resale price maintenance, relevant turnover under a promotional plan, and the causation and amount of damage arising from unfair labelling or advertising. It sets out, with a focus on the materials to be checked, how the party bearing the burden of proof and the required degree of proof differ between the stage of a disposition by the Korea Fair Trade Commission and the stage of a civil damages claim.
ReadCorporate rehabilitation ·Can Payments and Security Given in Exchange for New Funds or New Services Be Avoided? Contemporaneous Exchange and the Assessment of Harmfulness
This brief examines whether the provision of security or the extinguishment of obligations by a debtor unable to pay, in exchange for new borrowing, the supply of goods or the provision of services, is subject to avoidance. It does so within the scope of the avoidance provisions governing rehabilitation and bankruptcy and the summaries of three judgments. The central questions are whether the acts should be viewed together as one or separately, and as of what point in time harmfulness should be assessed.
ReadCapital markets & finance ·Must Profits Be Returned Where Shares Were Bought and Sold Within Six Months, Even If Long-Held Shares Were Sold? The Scope of, and Exceptions to, the Return of Short-Swing Profits
This brief examines, within the scope of the summaries of holdings in two judgments, how the liability to return short-swing profits under Article 172 of the Financial Investment Services and Capital Markets Act operates in transactions involving shares held from before the six-month period and in types of transactions not listed in the Enforcement Decree. It considers together a strict liability that does not ask whether information was used and the narrow gateway through which its application may be excluded.
ReadLabor & industrial relations ·How Far Do Prior-Consent Clauses and Special Hiring Clauses in Collective Agreements Bind the Employer? The Boundary Between Personnel Authority and the Freedom to Hire
Where a collective agreement ties the employer's decisions on dismissal and hiring to agreement with the trade union or to certain hiring obligations, this brief sets out, within the scope of the summaries of holdings of two judgments, how such clauses are interpreted and when their effect is denied. The focus is on the abuse and waiver of the right of prior consent and on the assessment of social order under Article 103 of the Civil Act.
ReadTax & international taxation ·Is a Wrongful Act Committed by an Employee the Taxpayer's Wrongful Act? Where the Extended Exclusion Period for Imposition and the Aggravated Penalty Tax Diverge
This brief examines whose acts the "wrongful act" under the Framework Act on National Taxes covers and how active the conduct must be, treating the extended exclusion period for imposition separately from the penalty taxes for wrongful failure to file and wrongful underreporting. Within the scope of the summaries of the two judgments, it sets out how each judgment dealt with, respectively, a breach-of-trust wrongful act by an employee and the creation of an outward appearance that accompanies a title trust.
ReadConstitutional, administrative & state liability ·When Is an Adverse Disposition Made Without Prior Notice and an Opportunity to Submit Opinions Revoked? Three Judgments That Read the Exceptions in the Administrative Procedures Act Narrowly
This brief examines when an adverse disposition becomes unlawful because it was made without the prior notice and submission of opinions required by Articles 21 and 22 of the Administrative Procedures Act. It sets out the scope of the exceptions and exclusions from application, and reads each of three judgments only as far as its summary goes. The central questions are whether three circumstances can each justify omitting the procedure: advance notice given by way of administrative guidance, a personnel disposition concerning a public official, and a prior criminal conviction.
ReadIP, data & telecommunications ·May Publicly Available Personal Information Be Reused Without Consent? The Unlawfulness of Commercial Re-provision and Refusal to Produce Documents on Grounds of Personal Information or Professional Secrets
This brief examines one Supreme Court judgment and one Supreme Court order separately. The judgment concerns whether it is unlawful to collect personal information that has already been made public and to provide it for a fee without separate consent. The order concerns the limits on refusing to produce documents on the ground that they contain personal information, such as the salaries of officers and employees, or professional secrets. The brief also notes that both decisions adopted a balancing of interests, and it sets out the differences between the Personal Information Protection Act in force at the time of the conduct and the current provisions.
ReadCivil obligations & remedies ·Liability Is Established, but Who Proves Negligence and the Amount of Damage? The Presumption of Negligence in the Execution of a Wrongful Provisional Disposition and the Assessment of Damages
This brief examines two Supreme Court judgments separately. The first concerns how negligence is presumed against a creditor who obtained a provisional remedy and whose defeat in the action on the merits has become final. The second concerns what the court must do when the occurrence of damage is established but the amount is difficult to prove. Among the requirements of Article 750 of the Civil Act, the brief sets out how case law and Article 202-2 of the Civil Procedure Act adjust the burden of proving negligence and the amount of damage.
ReadCustomary law & property rights ·Does a Judgment Won against a Clan Bind Its Members? The Res Judicata Effect of a Grave-Removal Judgment and the Limits of Declarations of Ownership over Unregistered Land
Two Supreme Court judgments are read separately on two questions. The first is whether a judgment ordering the removal of graves from clan (jongjung) land has effect as to the ownership determination in its reasons and as against clan members. The second is what a declaratory judgment of ownership obtained by subrogation proves in the case of unregistered land whose titleholder cannot be identified. The brief also sets out the capacity of an unincorporated association to be a party, the interest in seeking a declaratory judgment, and standing to sue in a creditor's subrogation action.
ReadCivil procedure & enforcement ·Can Facts Found in Another Judgment Be Used without Proof? The Scope of Facts Known to the Court (Judicial Notice) and the Standard of Proof in Civil Litigation
Facts known to the court (judicial notice) require no proof. Two Supreme Court judgments are read separately on two questions: whether the factual findings set out in the reasons of another civil judgment can be treated in the same way, and to what degree facts that do require proof must be proved. The brief also sets out the evidentiary weight of factual findings in a related judgment and which party bears the disadvantage of a fact that remains unproved.
ReadCivil procedure & enforcement ·Does the Winning Party Recover All the Costs It Incurred? Appraisal Fees in Cases Involving Litigation Aid, Attorneys' Fees Paid by a Third Party, and the Allocation of Costs in Cross-Appeals
This brief sets out how the judgment determining the burden of litigation costs is separated from the procedure for fixing the amount of those costs, and what the Supreme Court, in three rulings, considered may be examined at each stage. It reads separately three matters: the additional appraisal fees paid by the opponent of a party who received litigation aid, attorneys' fees agreed to by a third party, and the allocation of costs where cross-appeals are both dismissed.
ReadMilitary criminal & justice law ·How Far Must a Military Prosecutor's Seizure Relate to the Case? Nexus, the Suspect's Right of Participation and the Exclusion of Illegally Obtained Evidence under the Military Court Act
This brief examines two Supreme Court judgments. The first concerns the scope of the nexus requirement for a seizure and search executed by a military prosecutor under the former Military Court Act. The second concerns the suspect's right of participation where a third party voluntarily produced an information storage medium, in a case where Article 359-2 of the Military Court Act was cited together with Article 308-2 of the Criminal Procedure Act. The brief also sets out how the provisions of the two Acts correspond and how the legislation in force at the time of the conduct differs from the current legislation.
ReadEconomic crime ·Is Taking Money That Changed Hands Through Crime Embezzlement, and to Whom Does That Money Return? The Protective Value of the Entrustment Relationship and the Confiscation of Property Damaged by a Crime
This brief reads three Supreme Court judgments to examine two questions. The first is whether embezzlement is established where a custodian arbitrarily uses money entangled with a crime, such as victims' funds deposited into an account used for voice-phishing fraud or certificates handed over to conceal criminal proceeds. The second is whether that money can be confiscated, or its equivalent value collected, and returned to the victims. The brief distinguishes the protective value of the entrustment relationship, performance for an illegal cause, and the requirements of the special provisions on property damaged by a crime.
ReadEconomic crime ·What Is Included in, and What Is Excluded from, the Amount of Gain in Fraud and Extortion: Valuation and the Unit of Aggregation under Article 3 of the Specific Economic Crimes Act
Article 3 of the Act on the Aggravated Punishment, etc. of Specific Economic Crimes changes the statutory penalty at thresholds of KRW 500 million and KRW 5 billion in the amount of gain. The outcome therefore turns on how the amount of gain reflects four matters: partial payment of consideration, the strengthening of security for an extorted claim, the number of victims, and changes in circumstances after the offence is completed. Four Supreme Court judgments are read along the following axes: the entire amount delivered versus the substantive amount of gain, the time of valuation, and the unit of aggregation.
ReadViolent & serious crime ·How Far Can the Giver's Word Be Trusted Where Money Changed Hands Without Physical Evidence? The Credibility of a Giver's Statements and Their Retraction in Court
This brief examines, through three Supreme Court judgments, what must be weighed when the acceptance of a bribe, acceptance of money for good offices, or receipt of illegal political funds is to be found on the strength of the giver's statements in the absence of objective physical evidence such as financial records. It distinguishes the effect that rejecting part of a statement has on the remainder from the evaluation of a giver's statements where those made to the prosecution and those made in court diverge.
ReadCriminal & investigative procedure ·What Reopens a Final Conviction? The Novelty and Clarity of New Evidence and Proof of Official Misconduct as a Ground for Retrial
This brief reads separately, in the light of three Supreme Court decisions at the stage of commencing retrial, by what materials the new evidence under Article 420, subparagraph 5 of the Criminal Procedure Act and the official-misconduct ground under subparagraph 7 must each be proved. It distinguishes the materials the petitioner must gather, the scope of the existing evidence that the court must evaluate together with them, and whether a judgment of which no written judgment survives can be the subject of retrial.
ReadCriminal & investigative procedure ·Under a Multi-Agency Investigation System, Where Does the Fruit-of-the-Poisonous-Tree Line Fall Between Seizure for a Separate Offence, Requests for Supplemental Investigation, and the Exclusion of Illegally Obtained Evidence?
This brief sets out the Supreme Court's case law on when the causal link is attenuated or severed where items seized outside the scope stated in a warrant, or statements obtained in breach of procedure, become derivative evidence (fruit of the poisonous tree) when cases are transferred, or supplemental investigation is conducted, between investigative agencies and the prosecuting authority.
ReadCriminal & investigative procedure ·Where Does the Continuity of Original Hash Values Break in the Inter-Agency Transfer of Seized Electronic Information under the Amended Criminal Procedure Act in Force from October 2026?
This brief analyses the critical procedural points at which the identity of the original (hash values), the duty to stop searching, and the right of participation of the person from whom the items were seized and of defence counsel are broken when electronic information seized and copied by an investigative agency (the police or the Serious Crimes Investigation Agency) is referred or transferred to the Prosecution Service, together with the Supreme Court's case law excluding illegally obtained evidence.
ReadIP, data & telecommunications ·Infringement of Another Person's Secrets on an Information and Communications Network, Aiding Copyright Infringement by Linking, and Divulgence of Occupational Secrets: Standards from Three Judgments on Information and Communications and Intellectual Property
This brief uses three judgments to set out three questions: when the infringement of another person's secrets processed, stored or transmitted through an information and communications network is established; the standard for establishing aiding liability for commercial and continuous linking to posts that infringe copyright; and whether a medical professional's divulgence of occupational secrets extends to the secrets of a deceased person.
ReadCompetition & fair trade ·Unfair Support, Resale Price Maintenance and the Illegality of Large-Scale Promotional Support: Three Supreme Court Judgments under the Monopoly Regulation and Fair Trade Act
Three judgments are analysed on three topics. The first is unfair support to specially related persons and affiliates, together with the determination of the normal price where a transaction stage is added. The second is the review of justifiable grounds for minimum resale price maintenance. The third is the comprehensive illegality of large-scale promotional support and resale price fixing, and the standards for calculating the surcharge.
ReadLabor & industrial relations ·Statutory Reservation in Notifications of Non-Recognition as a Trade Union, the Principal Contractor's Status as Employer, and the Duty of Fair Representation: The Structure of Reasoning in Three Supreme Court Judgments on Collective Labour Law
Three judgments are reviewed on three questions. The first is the holding that a disposition notifying non-recognition as a trade union, issued under an enforcement decree without express delegation by statute, is unconstitutional and void. The second is the test for recognising a principal contractor as an employer bound to bargain collectively with a union of in-house subcontractor workers. The third is the duty of fair representation in the procedure for unifying the bargaining channel.
ReadCustomary law & property rights ·Prescriptive Acquisition of the Customary-Law Grave-Site Right and Rent, and the Attribution of Real Rights in Title-Trust Real Estate: The Boundaries of Three Civil Property Law Judgments
Drawing on three en banc judgments, this brief examines whether a customary-law grave-site right may be acquired by prescription over a grave installed before the Act on Funeral Services, Etc. took effect, when the obligation of a holder of a prescriptively acquired grave-site right to pay rent arises, and the doctrine excluding the rule on performance for an illegal cause in a title trust that violates the Act on the Registration of Real Estate under Actual Titleholder's Name.
ReadLabor & industrial relations ·The Ordinary-Wage Doctrine Abandoning the Fixedness Requirement and the Burden of Proving Proximate Causation in Industrial Accidents: Reading Three Supreme Court Labour Judgments
This brief uses three judgments to set out two lines of authority. The first is the en banc doctrine that redefined whether regular bonuses subject to an employment-status condition and a working-days condition constitute ordinary wages. The second concerns where the burden lies, under the Industrial Accident Compensation Insurance Act, to prove proximate causation between work and an accident.
ReadTax & international taxation ·The Beneficial Owner of Royalty Income, the Application of Tax Treaties, and the Limits of Delegation to Enforcement Decrees: Standards of Judgment in Three Supreme Court Tax Decisions
This brief uses three judgments to set out three matters. The first is the order in which, for withholding on patent royalties, the beneficial owner is identified and it is determined whether the income is domestic-source income. The second is how tax treaties and domestic tax law apply in relation to each other. The third is the value-added tax base and the limits of delegated legislation in the Enforcement Decree of the Value-Added Tax Act.
ReadCustomary law & property rights ·The Normative Force of Customary Law and Constitutional Equality: Standards from Three Supreme Court Judgments
The normative force of customary law is determined by whether society's conviction of its legal validity and the practice itself persist, and additionally by whether it conforms to the legal order as a whole at the time of application. A custom that discriminates on the basis of sex contrary to the constitutional principle of equality is no longer recognised as a legal norm.
ReadFamily & inheritance law ·Prescription of Claims for Past Child Support, the Limits of an Adult Guardian's Power of Representation, and the Determination of the Presider over Ancestral Rites: Standards from Three Supreme Court Rulings on Family and Inheritance Matters
This brief uses three rulings to set out whether extinctive prescription runs on a claim for past child support brought after the child has reached majority, whether the adult guardian of a victim in a state of unconsciousness may express on the victim's behalf the wish not to have the offender punished in an offence not punishable against the victim's express wishes, and the standards governing the attribution of remains and ashes and the determination of the presider over ancestral rites.
ReadConstitutional, administrative & state liability ·Final Judgments and Amended Statutes, Equality Review in Social Security, and Broadcasting Review: Standards of Decision in Three Supreme Court Public-Law Judgments
Through three judgments, this brief examines whether a subsequent action brought under a statute amended after a final judgment conflicts with res judicata, how a breach of the principle of equality is reviewed in the recognition of dependants under national health insurance, and the standards for reviewing objectivity and fairness according to the characteristics of the broadcasting medium and programme.
ReadCivil procedure & enforcement ·Deadline for Curing a Stamp Deficiency in a Petition of Appeal, Standing after a Collection Order, and Enforcement of Foreign Arbitral Awards: Standards in Three Supreme Court Decisions on Civil Procedure
This brief uses three decisions to set out three issues: the effective deadline for curing a stamp deficiency before an order dismissing a petition of appeal is rendered; standing in a merits action on an attached claim where a collection order and an attachment by disposition on default concur; and the boundary between an enforcement judgment on a foreign arbitral award and grounds for an objection to the claim.
ReadMilitary criminal & justice law ·Public Means in the Crime of Insulting a Superior, Seizure in Military Secrets Cases and Strict Construction of the Military Service Obligation: Three Judgments on Military Criminal Law and Military Justice
This brief examines three Supreme Court judgments: one on the interpretation of "public means" in the crime of insulting a superior under the Military Criminal Act, which overruled earlier precedent; one on the framework for reviewing "justifiable grounds" under Article 88(1) of the Military Service Act; and one on the scope of relevance in the search and seizure of a mobile phone in a case of leaking military secrets.
ReadCorporate law & governance ·The Exercise Period for Put Options and the Limits of Independence and Abstraction in Letter of Credit Negotiation: Standards of Decision in Three Commercial and International Transaction Judgments
This brief uses three judgments to analyse the standard for calculating the exclusion period for a put option, a right of formation under a shareholders' investment agreement; the time at which negotiation of a letter of credit takes place and the limits of the principle of independence and abstraction; and the requirements for refusing payment in a fraudulent transaction involving back-to-back letters of credit.
ReadCapital markets & finance ·Suitability and the Duty to Explain for High-Risk Derivatives, and the Duty of Care in Financial Institutions' Loan Screening: Standards Set by Three Supreme Court Judgments
This brief uses three judgments to set out how courts assess whether currency option derivative contracts are unfair or constitute standard terms and conditions, the scope of a bank's suitability principle and duty to explain, and, in project finance lending, a financial institution officer's duty of care of a good manager and the business judgment rule.
ReadCapital markets & finance ·The Duty to Explain in Specific Money Trusts, Preferential Beneficial Rights under Security Trusts, and Prepayment Fees on Loans: Interpretive Standards from Three Judgments on Financial Trusts and Loans
This brief examines three judgments addressing, respectively, the duty of prior investigation and explanation owed by a trust company that recommended a specific money trust; the relationship governing the attribution of the secured claim and the preferential beneficial right under a security trust when the secured claim is the subject of an assignment order; and whether a prepayment fee on a project finance loan constitutes deemed interest.
ReadTax & international taxation ·Beneficial Ownership under Tax Treaties, the Substance-over-Form Principle and Treaty Abuse: The Standards Applied in Three Supreme Court Decisions on International Taxation
Drawing on three Supreme Court decisions, this brief sets out how the determination of beneficial ownership under tax treaties is combined with the substance-over-form principle of the Framework Act on National Taxes in dividend and royalty payments routed through multi-tiered foreign holding companies, and the order in which anti-treaty-abuse provisions apply.
ReadTax & international taxation ·Title Trusts of Convertible Bonds and Tax Treaty Abuse: Standards of Economic Substance in Three Judgments
The three judgments distinguish the order in which economic substance is assessed in deemed taxation, treaty abuse and the disregard of transactions. They examine together the effect of the initial deemed gift, the overall circumstances, and the role of prices between unrelated parties.
ReadCorporate law & governance ·Internal-Control Oversight Duties of Directors of Large Companies, Non-Competition and Usurpation of Corporate Opportunities: An Analysis of Three Company Law Judgments
This brief examines, through three judgments, the standards for breach by representative directors and outside directors of large listed and construction companies of their duties to establish internal control systems and to oversee, and the principles for calculating damages where a director transferred an exclusive distribution right through a competing company in breach of the non-competition duty and through usurpation of a corporate opportunity.
ReadConstitutional, administrative & state liability ·Omission in Administrative Rule-Making, Emergency Decrees, and the Commencement of Limitation in Historical-Injustice Cases: Standards in Three Supreme Court Judgments on State Compensation Liability
This brief examines three en banc and leading judgments on three issues: the illegality of an omission in administrative rule-making that delayed guaranteeing the right of access of persons with disabilities; State compensation liability arising from the issuance, enforcement and adjudication of Presidential Emergency Decrees; and the point from which the short limitation period runs in retrial and truth-finding cases concerning historical injustices.
ReadCivil obligations & remedies ·Waiver of Extinctive Prescription, Epidemiological Causation and the Medical Duty to Explain: Standards of Assessment in Three Civil Damages Judgments
This brief analyses three Supreme Court judgments on three questions: the limits of presuming a waiver of the benefit of prescription from partial repayment of a debt after prescription has been completed; epidemiological correlation and proof of causation in product-defect litigation; and liability for breach of approval requirements and of the duty to explain in medical treatment at the clinical-trial stage.
ReadCapital markets & finance ·Undisclosed Information, Damages for Market Manipulation, and the Limits of Delegation to Enforcement Decrees: Three Judgments on Capital Markets Law
The three judgments address, respectively, the materiality of information, causation in damages claims for market manipulation, and the limits of delegation to enforcement decrees. This brief examines the applicable standards, the burden of proof, and how the basis for delegation differs from one period to another.
ReadCapital markets & finance ·Materiality of Capital Market Information and the Legality of Investigative Procedure: Standards Set Out in Three Judgments
The three judgments address, side by side, the standard for determining material matters, the scope of non-public information, and the legality of seizure procedures. This brief examines the requirements to be checked and the scope of proof in each case, together with the remaining issues.
ReadCorporate rehabilitation ·Late Filing of Rehabilitation Claims, Standards for Confirmation of the Plan, and Extinction of Trust Beneficial Rights: Three Supreme Court Decisions
This brief addresses the acceptance of late filings and the role of the claim investigation and determination procedure, the standards for the court's ex officio review in confirming a rehabilitation plan, and trust beneficial rights and the assessment of fraudulent acts. It sets out together the legal principles of the three decisions and the points to check in practice.
ReadCorporate rehabilitation ·The Boundary between Avoidance and Termination of Bilateral Contracts: Simultaneous Performance, Revival of the Underlying Claim, and the Right of Termination
This brief examines, in turn, the limits on altering a claim of simultaneous performance, the revival of the underlying claim after avoidance, and the requirements for a bankruptcy trustee's right of termination. The analysis turns on the prohibition of disadvantageous alteration and on the reciprocal nature of the remaining performances.
ReadCorporate rehabilitation ·Boundaries on the Exercise of Rights in Rehabilitation and Bankruptcy: Good Faith, the Duty to Explain, and Taking Over of Litigation
Three judgments respectively clarify the limits on the exercise of rights in rehabilitation and bankruptcy proceedings, the scope of the debtor's duty to explain, and the taking over of litigation after discontinuance of the proceedings. The balancing criteria under the principle of good faith are also examined.
ReadViolent & serious crime ·Substantive Danger in Incitement to Insurrection, Intrusion upon a Shared Residence, and Medical Self-Determination: Constituent Elements in Three Supreme Court Judgments on Serious Crimes
Three judgments are used to examine the requirements of substantive danger and agreement in incitement to insurrection and conspiracy to commit insurrection, the boundaries of the crime of intrusion upon a residence that disturbs the de facto peace of a shared residence, and the criteria for occupational negligence resulting in death in surgery on a patient who refused blood transfusion.
ReadCriminal & investigative procedure ·Competency of Accomplices as Witnesses, the Distinction of Hearsay Evidence, and Separate Sentencing for Concurrent Crimes: Three Supreme Court Judgments on Criminal Trial Procedure
Three Supreme Court judgments are used to set out the competency as witnesses of accomplice co-defendants whose proceedings have been separated, the distinction between original evidence and hearsay evidence according to the fact to be proved, and the scope of separate sentencing under the Public Official Election Act. The order in which the admissibility of in-court statements and of documents is determined is also examined.
ReadCriminal & investigative procedure ·Admissibility of Unlawfully Obtained Electronic Information and Evidence from Defective Seizure Procedures: A Review of Three Supreme Court Judgments
This brief addresses unlawfully obtained electronic information and derivative evidence, the search and seizure procedure where a minor is involved, and the duty to return seized items after a request for an ex post warrant is rejected. The three judgments set out the standard for excluding evidence obtained in breach of procedure and the allocation of the burden of proof.
ReadCriminal & investigative procedure ·The Warrant Requirement in Search and Seizure and the Limits of Admissibility: Voluntary Production, Relevance, and Defence Counsel's Documents
The prosecutor must prove that a voluntary production was in fact voluntary, to the point of dispelling any doubt, and the scope of seizure is limited to the minimum information related to the suspected offence. Legal-advice documents may not be seized unless there is a compelling public-interest necessity.
ReadCapital markets & finance ·Price Manipulation, the Genuine Omission Offense, and the Scope of an Agent — Requirements in Three Supreme Court Decisions under the Financial Investment Services and Capital Markets Act
On three issues (price manipulation, the reporting of large holdings, and the use of undisclosed information), the Supreme Court based its decisions on the substance of the constituent elements. What matters is who bears the obligation and what business is actually performed, not form or title.
ReadEconomic crime ·Strict Interpretation of Punishment Requirements and Procedural Qualifications in Economic Crime — A Review of the Legal Principles in Three Supreme Court Judgments
The Supreme Court recognised standing to file a complaint only for a complaint concerning a crime against the property under administration, and narrowly confined both the scope of a project operator and the meaning of revenue in its charge. Together, the three decisions show that the requirements of penal provisions and procedural qualifications must be interpreted strictly.
ReadEconomic crime ·Standards for Determining Obstruction of Business, Embezzlement, and Improper Support — Constituent Elements in Three Supreme Court Judgments
The Supreme Court specified the scope of business protected by the offense of obstruction of business, whether property falls within the scope of embezzlement, and the normal-price standard for improper support. The three judgments show an approach that determines the constituent elements according to the facts.
ReadEconomic crime ·The Bounds of Economic Crime — Tax Invoices Without Actual Transactions, the Statute of Limitations under Dual Punishment Provisions, and Confiscation and Additional Collection
At issue are the receipt and issuance of tax invoices without an actual transaction, the suspension of the statute of limitations for prosecuting a business owner under a dual punishment provision, and the damage-recovery requirement for confiscating corrupt proceeds. The three decisions each read the requirements strictly but reached different conclusions on the scope of punishment: 2025Do13674 held that the actors subject to punishment are not limited to false-invoice dealers, while 2024Do15290 and 2023Do17596 each ruled in a direction that limits the scope of punishment.
ReadViolent & serious crime ·Where Do Intent to Kill and Liability as a Principal Diverge — The Boundaries of Omission, Joint Principal Offender, and Aiding
Where a risk of death or serious injury has arisen, we use the statutory text and the original text of the judgments to examine the dolus eventualis (conditional intent) of an offender by omission, the boundary between joint principals by conspiracy and aiders, and the scope of mitigation for attempted special injury.
ReadCapital markets & finance ·Financial Statements That Violate Accounting Standards — Who Is Sanctioned, and at How Many Levels?
This organizes the distinctions drawn by the Act on External Audit of Stock Companies (the External Audit Act) between the administrative measures and penalty surcharges, the criminal punishment and dual punishment provisions, and the administrative fines applied to financial statements that violate accounting processing standards. It examines whether administrative measures, penalty surcharges, and criminal penalties all attach to the same violation only as far as the original text addresses that question, and then considers the questions that remain.
ReadCorporate rehabilitation ·Does the Representative Stay On as Administrator? — Who Holds Directors and Others Liable?
Working from the original text, this brief sets out how the representative-as-administrator principle and the procedures for preserving and investigating the liability of directors and others fit together. It separately examines the materials needed for the determination and the points at which interpretation diverges.
ReadEconomic crime ·The Offense of Taking Property Abroad — What Counts as Taking, and How Is It Punished?
Working from the original text, this brief sets out the two types of conduct that constitute taking property abroad, the punishment scaled to the amount taken abroad, attempts and the dual punishment provisions, and the link to confiscation and collection of equivalent value. Because the original texts of the foreign exchange statutes and regulations were not compared, they are not covered here.
ReadEconomic crime ·When Is the Employment Restriction Lifted? — Restriction on Employment and Prohibition on Permits, etc. under Article 14 of the Act on the Aggravated Punishment, etc. of Specific Economic Crimes
Within the scope of the original text, this brief sets out who is subject to the restriction on employment under Article 14, how long it lasts, and how its approval structure works. For this brief, the provisions of the Presidential Decree were not compared against the original text.
ReadCapital markets & finance ·How Is the Benefit from a Violation Calculated? — The Standards for Fines and Surcharges
This brief explains how the calculation of the benefit from unfair trade practice violations sets both criminal penalties and surcharges. The figures and provisos in the original text are treated separately, and the brief also addresses the fact that the attached table was not received.
ReadEconomic crime ·Whose Books Are Used to Calculate the Gain from Breach of Trust? — The Gap Between the Aggravated Punishment Range and the Assessment of Damage
This brief asks what materials can confirm, respectively, the amount of gain that determines the aggravated punishment range and the damage the company actually suffered.
ReadCapital markets & finance ·There Was Window Dressing, but Who Knew? — The Limits of Proving Intent in Large-Scale Accounting Fraud Cases
This brief separately examines what evidence must connect errors in the financial statements to the drafter's awareness, and the internal approval records and audit procedures.
ReadCorporate rehabilitation ·Must Repayment Just Before Reversal Be Restored — The Structure of Exercising the Right of Avoidance and Defense in Corporate Rehabilitation Proceedings
Where the administrator avoids repayments made and security granted in times of crisis, this brief asks what the counterparty can confirm and what interpretation it can offer.
ReadEconomic crime ·Who Is a Person Handling the Affairs of Another? — The Boundary Between Breach of Trust and Embezzlement
This examines the boundary of the subjects of breach of trust and embezzlement through cases of transfer of claims as security and transfers of virtual assets. It also organizes the structure of increased punishment based on the amount of gain under the Act on the Aggravated Punishment, etc. of Specific Economic Crimes (Act on the Aggravated Punishment, etc. of Specific Economic Crimes) and the issues that follow from it.
ReadCriminal & investigative procedure ·How Far Does the Seizure of a Mobile Phone Reach? — Asking the Scope of Relevance
This organizes the scope of relevance to the suspicion and the procedural issues in the seizure of electronic information from mobile phones and storage media. It separately examines, within the range stated by the provisions and the judgments, the wording of the warrant and the criteria for sorting, participation, and unrelated information.
ReadCorporate rehabilitation ·Whom Does the Right of Avoidance in Bankruptcy Reach? — Restoration to the Original State and Prohibition of Set-off
This examines to whom the effect of the exercise of the right of avoidance extends in the bankruptcy proceedings under the Debtor Rehabilitation and Bankruptcy Act (Debtor Rehabilitation and Bankruptcy Act). Within the range stated by the wording of Articles 391, 397, and 422 and by the original text of the judgments, it separately organizes materials to check and possible readings.
ReadCapital markets & finance ·How Far Is Information Received at Second Hand Sanctioned? — The Division Between Article 174 and Article 178-2
This examines whether the criminal punishment under Article 174 stops at the first recipient of the information. It organizes how far the penalty surcharge under Article 429-2 for a violation of Article 178-2 covers persons who received or otherwise acquired it.
ReadCapital markets & finance ·How Are Profits Gained from Unfair Transactions Counted? — Realization and Attribution
This organizes, from the original text of judgments, the method of counting profits gained from unfair transactions under the Financial Investment Services and Capital Markets Act (Financial Investment Services and Capital Markets Act). Realized and unrealized profits, the attribution of a corporation's profits, and causation remain as issues.
ReadEconomic crime ·What Is a Virtual Asset in Criminal Law? — What Are the Criteria Distinguishing Seizure, Fraud, and Breach of Trust?
This examines from the original text the possibility of seizing Bitcoin, whether a virtual asset can constitute the object of the offense of fraud, and whether the use of virtual assets received by mistake constitutes breach of trust. The organization of the criteria stated by the three judgments and of the remaining questions is the focus of this article.
ReadCorporate rehabilitation ·When a Rehabilitation Plan Is Approved, Do Unreported Claims Disappear? — Discharge and Modification of Rights
Because unreported claims may remain even after the approval of a rehabilitation plan, this separately examines the forfeiture of rights, the modification of rights, and the scope of discharge.
ReadCorporate rehabilitation ·A rehabilitation Procedure growing faster — for whom does the time to prepare remain?
Bill No. 2204441, which would change the subjects and period of simplified rehabilitation and convert individual rehabilitation filings into bankruptcy petitions. These are editorial questions appended while reading the burden of the prior list, the scope of the continuing protection, and the standard for leaving the tools of livelihood.
ReadCriminal & investigative procedure ·The Computer Was Returned, but Where Did the Information Remain? A Structural Analysis of a Case on the Search and Seizure of Electronic Information
Supreme Court Order 2011Mo1839 dated July 16, 2015 (en banc). The analysis reconstructs the path the information took from the removal of the original storage media through imaging, re-copying and a warrant for a separate offence. It then reads the judgments that diverged over the same facts, which treated them as a whole procedure, as individual stages, or item of information by item of information.
ReadLATEST PUBLICATIONS
The latest research and library additions.
The newest entries of the research formats come first, then the latest additions across the library. Each entry identifies its format, evidence and questions left open.
Decision ledger · Labor
Worker dispatch judged on substance, not contract form
When an employer has a worker perform work for a third party, when does that relationship amount to worker dispatch governed by the Act on the Protection, etc. of Dispatched Workers?
Read this entryReform tracker note · Public law & state liabilityProcessing periods for petitions may now be extended only on listed grounds: what the May 2026 amendment to the Enforcement Decree of the Civil Petitions Treatment Act changes
Under Presidential Decree No. 36296, the grounds for extending a petition's processing period are now listed, and a heavy workload alone cannot justify an extension; an agency may correct a simple error in an application with the petitioner's consent; and the chair of the petition conciliation committee may be an outside expert. The rules on correction and extension apply to petitions received after the amendment enters into force on 6 May 2026.
Read this entryLegislative question · Legislation & policyIf public health doctors' service is reduced to two years and the cap on their remuneration is abolished, what is left for doctors already serving and for the private institutions where doctors are placed? Five questions on Bill No. 2221849 to amend the Special Act on Health and Medical Care in Farming and Fishing Villages, Etc.
Bill No. 2221849, a partial amendment to the Special Act on Health and Medical Care in Farming and Fishing Villages, Etc., seeks to reduce the mandatory service of public health doctors to two years, including the period of military training call-up; to pay them at an appropriate level prescribed by Presidential Decree instead of capping their pay at military rates; and to add new provisions on remuneration and support for dedicated primary health care officials and other staff. Reading the bill alongside current Articles 7, 11, 15, and 24 of the Act and Article 44 of the Local Public Officials Act, this entry sets out the questions that remain.
Read this entryAlso new in the library
- Preparation question · Courtroom가정보호사건에서 법원은 증인신문, 감정, 통역 및 번역에 관한 어떤 규정을 따르고, 그 규정은 어느 범위까지 어긋날 수 있을까?
- Preparation question · Scope무죄재판을 받은 사건의 재판서 게재를 누가 청구할 수 있고, 그 청구에 어떤 조건이 붙을까?
- Preparation question · Scope누가 산재보험 의료기관에 근로자의 진료에 관한 보고나 서류·물건의 제출을 요구할 수 있고, 어떤 인정이 있어야 그런 요구를 할 수 있을까?
- Preparation question · Scope사람이 인지에 따라 대한민국 국적을 취득하면, 누가 어떤 순서로 움직여야 할까?
What PRO SE does
- Receives, logs and keeps the original
- Organises facts, evidence and issues
- Drafts written replies on RISCON matters
- Keeps dates, states and proof in one record
What stays with the party
- Signing and sending under their own name
- Logging in to e-filing and submitting
- Appearing in court and speaking there
- Every decision, settlement included
PRO SE is RISCON’s legal research space, not a lawyer’s office, and it does not stand in for anyone in court. It prepares and organises; filing, appearing and deciding stay with the party. Public pages are general information, not legal advice or an official court service.