Open Decision Ledger · Capital markets & finance
Mass sale of the underlying asset that obstructed fulfillment of the redemption conditions of equity-linked securities and the claim for damages under the Financial Investment Services and Capital Markets Act by holding investors
Translated from the Korean original. Read the Korean
Supreme Court, Apr. 9, 2015, 2013Ma1052 (ruling)
Case name: 소송허가사건·소송허가신청
Official text on the National Law Information Center
Question
May an investor who merely held equity-linked securities until maturity claim damages under Article 179 of the Financial Investment Services and Capital Markets Act where the redemption conditions came to naught as a result of a mass sale of the underlying asset on the redemption reference date?
Holding
Where, in a product whose redemption is determined by the price of the underlying asset, a party has used wrongful means to influence the fulfillment of the conditions, this constitutes a violation of Article 178 paragraph (1) subparagraph 1. The Supreme Court held that an investor who has thereby suffered loss, because the content of the rights and obligations has changed or the settlement amount has differed, may claim damages even without an active transaction, and reversed the court below.
Summary of the holding, verbatim
위반행위로 인하여 금융투자상품 투자자의 권리·의무의 내용이 변경되거나 결제되는 금액이 달라져 투자자가 손해를 입었다면 투자자는 부정거래행위자에 대하여 자본시장법 제179조 제1항에 따라 손해배상을 청구할 수 있다.
Unofficial English translation
If, as a result of such a violation, the contents of the rights and obligations of the investor in the financial investment product are changed, or the amount settled differs, and the investor has suffered damage, the investor may claim damages against the person who committed the unfair trading under Article 179, paragraph (1) of the Financial Investment Services and Capital Markets Act.
Disposition
Reversed and remanded Stated in the decision
원심결정을 파기하고, 사건을 서울고등법원에 환송한다.
Unofficial English translation
The order of the court below is reversed, and the case is remanded to the Seoul High Court.
Form of the test
Elements stated Stated in the decision
자본시장법 제178조 제1항 제1호를 위반한 행위에 해당하고
Unofficial English translation
constitutes an act in violation of Article 178, paragraph (1), subparagraph 1 of the Financial Investment Services and Capital Markets Act, and
Factors
- 해당 금융투자상품의 구조와 거래방식 및 거래경위
- 금융투자상품으로부터 발생하는 투자자의 권리·의무 및 종료 시기
- 투자자와 행위자의 관계, 행위 전후의 제반 사정
- 투자자의 권리·의무의 내용이 변경되거나 결제되는 금액이 달라져
Unofficial English translation
• the structure and trading method of the financial investment product concerned, and the circumstances of the transaction
• the rights and obligations of the investor arising from the financial investment product and the time of termination
• the relationship between the investor and the actor, and all the circumstances before and after the act
• the contents of the rights and obligations of the investor are changed, or the amount settled differs
Relation to precedent
States a new standard Read from the decision
사회통념상 부정하다고 인정되는 수단이나 기교 등을 사용하여 금융투자상품에서 정한 권리행사나 조건성취에 영향을 주는 행위를 하였다면
Unofficial English translation
the person has performed an act of affecting the exercise of a right or the satisfaction of a condition as provided for in the financial investment product by using means, techniques, or the like recognized as unfair in light of common sense
Decisions referred to
None listed
Burden of proof
Not addressed Not in the decision
Open question and revisit condition
Where there is a mass sale of the underlying asset that is a transaction for risk hedging under a swap agreement, by what standard is it determined whether the sale constitutes wrongful means in light of generally accepted ideas?
If Article 178 or Article 179 of the Financial Investment Services and Capital Markets Act, or Article 3 of the Securities-Related Class Action Act, is amended, this reading is to be re-examined.
Cross-family AI independent reading & axis check
6 of 8 axes matched GPT-6 Astra (OpenAI, codex CLI) · 2026-10-16
In a comparison with an independent reading by another family of AI (GPT-6 Astra), which read only the original text without seeing the primary reading, 6 of the 8 axes matched, while the readings diverged on Axis 4 (Form of the test) and Axis 6 (Relation to precedent).
Axis 4 (Form of the test): Primary “Elements stated” vs Independent “Circumstances weighed”
Since the original text calls for a comprehensive consideration of the various transaction circumstances while presenting wrongful means, the influence on the fulfillment of the conditions, and the occurrence of loss, the primary reading attends to the elements, whereas the independent reading attends to the method of comprehensive judgment.
투자자와 행위자의 관계, 행위 전후의 제반 사정 등을 종합적으로 고려하여 판단하여야 한다.Axis 6 (Relation to precedent): Primary “States a new standard” vs Independent “Cannot be determined”
Since the original text expressly sets out the legal principle of damages for obstruction of the fulfillment of conditions, the primary reading may read it as setting out a new standard, but as the relationship to existing precedent is not directly explained, the independent reading may read it as cannot be determined.
사회통념상 부정하다고 인정되는 수단이나 기교 등을 사용하여 금융투자상품에서 정한 권리행사나 조건성취에 영향을 주는 행위를 하였다면Raw 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 held that the appellant, after acquiring the equity-linked securities, held them only passively and inactively until maturity and never actively transacted, such as by buying, selling or exchanging those securities or providing them as collateral, as a result of the opposing party's mass sale of the underlying asset, and therefore had no right to claim damages under Article 179 of the Financial Investment Services and Capital Markets Act; it further held that the application for leave to bring the action failed to meet the requirements of Article 3 of the Securities-Related Class Action Act.
Supreme Court standard: The Supreme Court cited the circumstances that the redemption amount of the equity-linked securities in this case was structured to be determined by the closing price of the underlying asset on the redemption reference date, that the counterparty to the swap agreement sold a large quantity of the common shares of Company 3, a non-party, around the close of the market on April 22, 2009, so that the closing price was set at 119,000 won, lower than the maturity redemption reference price of 119,625 won, and that the investors thereby received only approximately 74.6% of their investment. It held that such a claim falls within a claim for damages under Article 179 paragraph (1), and, holding that the court below had misapprehended the legal principle concerning the scope of persons entitled to claim, reversed and remanded the order of the court below.
Distinguishing conditions
- Where the redemption or settlement of a financial investment product is not structured to be determined by the price of the underlying asset at a specified point in time
- Where the purchase and sale of the underlying asset is an ordinary risk-hedging transaction that cannot be regarded as wrongful means or a scheme in light of generally accepted ideas
- Where the actor did not engage in linked transactions with the issuer and thus has no interest adverse to that of the investors
Record verification notes
Before bringing the same claim, the circumstances in which the closing price on the redemption reference date was formed, the timing and volume of the actor's sales, and the content of the linked agreements between the actor and the issuer should first be confirmed through transaction records.
From the official text
Points at issue
자본시장과 금융투자업에 관한 법률 제178조에서 금지하고 있는 부정행위에 해당하는지 판단하는 기준 / 특정 시점의 기초자산 가격 등에 따라 권리행사 또는 조건성취 여부가 결정되거나 금전 등이 결제되는 구조로 되어 있는 금융투자상품의 경우, 사회통념상 부정하다고 인정되는 수단 등을 사용하여 한 권리행사나 조건성취에 영향을 주는 행위가 자본시장과 금융투자업에 관한 법률 제178조 제1항 제1호를 위반한 부정행위에 해당하는지 여부(적극) 및 위반행위로 인하여 손해를 입은 투자자가 부정거래행위자에 대하여 자본시장과 금융투자업에 관한 법률 제179조 제1항에 따라 손해배상을 청구할 수 있는지 여부(적극)
Unofficial English translation
The criteria for determining whether an act constitutes an unfair act prohibited under Article 178 of the Financial Investment Services and Capital Markets Act / In the case of a financial investment product structured such that the exercise of a right or the satisfaction of a condition, or the settlement of money or the like, is determined by the price of the underlying assets at a certain point in time, whether an act of affecting the exercise of a right or the satisfaction of a condition by using means or the like recognized as unfair in light of common sense constitutes an unfair act in violation of Article 178, paragraph (1), subparagraph 1 of the Financial Investment Services and Capital Markets Act (affirmative), and whether an investor who has suffered damage as a result of such a violation may claim damages against the person who committed the unfair trading under Article 179, paragraph (1) of the Financial Investment Services and Capital Markets Act (affirmative)
Summary of the holding
어느 행위가 금융투자상품의 거래와 관련하여 자본시장과 금융투자업에 관한 법률(이하 ‘자본시장법’이라 한다) 제178조에서 금지하고 있는 부정행위에 해당하는지 여부는, 해당 금융투자상품의 구조와 거래방식 및 거래경위, 금융투자상품이 거래되는 시장의 특성, 금융투자상품으로부터 발생하는 투자자의 권리·의무 및 종료 시기, 투자자와 행위자의 관계, 행위 전후의 제반 사정 등을 종합적으로 고려하여 판단하여야 한다. 따라서 특정 시점의 기초자산 가격 또는 그와 관련된 수치에 따라 권리행사 또는 조건성취의 여부가 결정되거나 금전 등이 결제되는 구조로 되어 있는 금융투자상품의 경우에 사회통념상 부정하다고 인정되는 수단이나 기교 등을 사용하여 금융투자상품에서 정한 권리행사나 조건성취에 영향을 주는 행위를 하였다면, 이는 금융투자상품의 거래와 관련하여 부정행위를 한 것으로서 자본시장법 제178조 제1항 제1호를 위반한 행위에 해당하고, 위반행위로 인하여 금융투자상품 투자자의 권리·의무의 내용이 변경되거나 결제되는 금액이 달라져 투자자가 손해를 입었다면 투자자는 부정거래행위자에 대하여 자본시장법 제179조 제1항에 따라 손해배상을 청구할 수 있다.
Order
원심결정을 파기하고, 사건을 서울고등법원에 환송한다.
Unofficial English translation
The order of the court below is reversed, and the case is remanded to the Seoul High Court.
Provisions referred to
자본시장과 금융투자업에 관한 법률 제178조 제1항 제1호, 제179조 제1항
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