Open Decision Ledger · Capital markets & finance
Nature of the period for exercising the claim for disgorgement of short-swing trading profits under the former Securities and Exchange Act, and compliance with that period by means of an extrajudicial claim
Translated from the Korean original. Read the Korean
Supreme Court, Jan. 12, 2012, 2011Da80203 (judgment)
Case name: 손해배상등
Official text on the National Law Information Center
Question
Is the period for exercising the claim for disgorgement of short-swing trading profits under Article 188 of the former Securities and Exchange Act a period for filing suit, requiring a judicial claim, or a period for exercising the right that may also be observed by an extrajudicial claim?
Holding
The period relating to the claim for disgorgement of short-swing trading profits is an exclusion period, being a period for exercising the right by judicial or extrajudicial means, and not a period for filing suit. The Supreme Court upheld the court below, which found that the exclusion period had been observed by an extrajudicial claim made by registered mail.
Summary of the holding, verbatim
단기매매차익 반환청구권에 관한 기간은 제척기간으로서 재판상 또는 재판외의 권리행사기간이며 재판상 청구를 위한 출소기간은 아니다.
Unofficial English translation
The period pertaining to the claim for the return of short-term trading profits is an exclusion period, being a period for exercising rights in or out of court, and is not a period for instituting a judicial claim.
Disposition
Dismissed Stated in the decision
상고를 기각한다.
Unofficial English translation
The appeal is dismissed.
Form of the test
Elements stated Stated in the decision
재판상 또는 재판외의 권리행사기간이며 재판상 청구를 위한 출소기간은 아니다
Unofficial English translation
a period for exercising rights in or out of court, and is not a period for instituting a judicial claim
Factors
- 6월 이내의 단기간에 그 법인의 주식 등을 사고파는 경우
- 미공개 내부정보를 이용하였을 개연성이 크다는 점
- 내부자가 실제로 미공개 내부정보를 이용하였는지나
- 단기매매차익 반환청구권에 관한 기간은 제척기간으로서
Unofficial English translation
• in cases where shares, etc. of the corporation are bought and sold within a short period of six months
• the fact that there is a high likelihood that undisclosed inside information was used
• whether an insider actually used undisclosed inside information, or
• the period pertaining to the claim for the return of short-term trading profits, as an exclusion period,
Relation to precedent
Follows earlier decisions Stated in the decision
대법원 2008. 3. 13. 선고 2006다73218 판결
Unofficial English translation
Supreme Court Decision 2006Da73218 decided March 13, 2008
Decisions referred to
대법원 2008. 3. 13. 선고 2006다73218 판결(공2008상, 517)
Burden of proof
Not addressed Not in the decision
Open question and revisit condition
After the exclusion period has been observed by an extrajudicial claim, is there a separate time limit within which the corporation must bring an action?
We will re-examine this reading if the provision on the period for exercising the claim for disgorgement in Article 172 of the current Financial Investment Services and Capital Markets Act is amended, or if the Supreme Court's holding on its nature changes.
Cross-family AI independent reading & axis check
7 of 8 axes matched GPT-6 Astra (OpenAI, codex CLI) · 2026-10-16
In a comparison with an independent reading by another AI model (GPT-6 Astra), which read only the original text without seeing the first reading, 7 of the 8 axes agreed, while the readings diverged on the eighth axis (Open question and revisit condition).
Axis 8 (Open question and revisit condition): Primary “After the exclusion period has been observed by an extrajudicial claim, is there a separate time limit within which the corporation must bring an action?” vs Independent “What content and degree of specificity must an extrajudicial claim for disgorgement have in order to be recognized as observing the exclusion period?”
The first reading asks about the time limit for bringing an action after the extrajudicial claim, while the independent reading asks about the content and specificity required of the extrajudicial claim in order to observe the period.
단기매매차익 반환청구권에 관한 기간은 제척기간으로서 재판상 또는 재판외의 권리행사기간이며 재판상 청구를 위한 출소기간은 아니다.Raw responses and comparison record: Protocol · Blind readings (JSONL) · Axis comparison (JSONL) · SHA-256 (JSON)
Lower-court contrast & scope of application
Lower-court reading vs. Supreme Court holding
Lower-court context: The court below found that the plaintiff had, on December 8, 2008, demanded from the defendant, who was an executive officer at that time, the return of the short-swing trading profits by registered mail, that the demand reached the defendant on December 9, 2008, and held that the claim, to the extent of the 169,781,463 won acquired by the defendant through short-swing trading during the period from December 10, 2006 to December 9, 2008, counting back two years from that date, was proper on the ground that the exclusion period had been observed.
Supreme Court standard: The Supreme Court set out the legal principle that the period for the claim for disgorgement of short-swing trading profits is an exclusion period, being a period for exercising the right by judicial or extrajudicial means, and, finding no misapprehension of legal principles in the determination of the court below, which recognized compliance with the period on the basis of the time of the extrajudicial claim, dismissed the final appeal.
Distinguishing conditions
- Cases where a different exclusion period is at issue and the statute expressly provides that the period for exercising the right is a period for filing suit requiring a judicial claim
- Cases where the extrajudicial claim did not reach the opposing party, or where the date of receipt fell more than two years after the date on which the profit was acquired
- Cases arising under Article 172 of the current Financial Investment Services and Capital Markets Act where the wording or structure of the provision on the period for exercising the right differs from that of the former Securities and Exchange Act
Record verification notes
Before asserting the same conclusion, one should compare the date on which the extrajudicial claim was received against the date on which the profit was acquired through each short-swing trade, to confirm that the two-year period was observed for each transaction.
From the official text
Points at issue
구 증권거래법 제188조 제2항에 정한 단기매매차익 반환제도의 제도적 취지 및 단기매매차익 반환청구권의 행사기간의 성질(=제척기간)
Unofficial English translation
The institutional purpose of the short-term trading profit return system prescribed in Article 188 (2) of the former Securities and Exchange Act, and the nature of the period for exercising the claim for the return of short-term trading profits (= exclusion period)
Summary of the holding
구 증권거래법(2007. 8. 3. 법률 제8635호 자본시장과 금융투자업에 관한 법률 부칙 제2조로 폐지, 이하 ‘구 증권거래법’이라 한다) 제188조 제2항의 단기매매차익 반환제도는 주권상장법인 또는 코스닥상장법인의 내부자가 6월 이내의 단기간에 그 법인의 주식 등을 사고파는 경우 미공개 내부정보를 이용하였을 개연성이 크다는 점에서 거래 자체는 허용하되 그 대신 내부자가 실제로 미공개 내부정보를 이용하였는지나 내부자에게 미공개 내부정보를 이용하여 이득을 취하려는 의사가 있었는지를 묻지 않고 내부자로 하여금 거래로 얻은 이익을 법인에 반환하도록 하는 엄격한 책임을 인정함으로써 내부자가 미공개 내부정보를 이용하여 법인의 주식 등을 거래하는 행위를 간접적으로 규제하려는 제도로, 단기매매차익 반환청구권에 관한 기간은 제척기간으로서 재판상 또는 재판외의 권리행사기간이며 재판상 청구를 위한 출소기간은 아니다.
Order
상고를 기각한다. 상고비용은 피고가 부담한다.
Unofficial English translation
The appeal is dismissed. The appeal costs shall be borne by the defendant.
Provisions referred to
구 증권거래법(2007. 8. 3. 법률 제8635호 자본시장과 금융투자업에 관한 법률 부칙 제2조로 폐지) 제188조(현행 자본시장과 금융투자업에 관한 법률 제172조 참조)
Read 2026-10-16 · Cross-read 2026-10-16. All quotes matched against the official text. The Chinese-character placeholders the court used for anonymised parties are given in their Korean readings, and parenthetical Chinese-character glosses are omitted.
Every entry is published only after all quotes have been matched character by character against the official text, and audited by an independent second reading from a different model family across all eight axes. Both agreed axes and text-grounded interpretive divergences are recorded openly. The ledger is a research record, not an assessment of the court or advice on any matter.
Back to the ledger