LIN NEWS
-
LIN NewsLIN advises NV5 on Entry into Korean Data Center Market through Strategic M&ALIN, in collaboration with U.S. law firm Duane Morris, successfully advised NV5, a global leader in tech-enabled engineering and consulting solutions, on its acquisition of SA Bricks, a Korean company specializing in data center commissioning and energy efficiency. South Korea’s data center market is undergoing rapid expansion, fueled by growing demand for cloud computing and artificial intelligence (AI). This has led to a surge in investment from both domestic and international technology firms. Through this strategic acquisition, NV5 has officially entered the Korean market, extending its data center operations to 15 countries across North America, Asia, Australia, and the Middle East. Ben Heraud, CEO of NV5, commented: “Demand for NV5’s data center design and commissioning services continues to be strong for hyperscale data centers in the U.S. and international markets, and this entry into the South Korean market is our latest expansion into high-growth regions for data center infrastructure.” LIN’s team, led by Partners David Yang and Haekyung Sung, provided comprehensive legal support throughout the transaction, including legal due diligence and negotiation of the stock purchase agreement. Their timely and precise guidance helped ensure a smooth and successful closing. Full article ▼ https://ir.nv5.com/news-events/news-releases/news-details/2025/NV5-Strengthens-South-Korea-Data-Center-Capabilities-Positioned-for-Accelerated-Organic-Growth/default.aspx2025.06.11
-
News Letter[Mobility Legal Updates] Autonomous Vehicles ActOn April 30, 2025, the Ministry of Land, Infrastructure and Transport (MOLIT) amended the Enforcement Decree of the Act on the Promotion of and Support for Commercialization of Autonomous Vehicles (hereinafter "Autonomous Vehicles Act") (Presidential Decree No. 35489) to accelerate the commercialization of self-driving cars, and on June 2, 2025, partially amended the Enforcement Rule (MOLIT Ordinance No. 1496) in connection with the said amended Enforcement Decree. This newsletter summarizes the key amendments to the Enforcement Decree. 1. Purpose of the Amendments There has been a recognized need to supplement the legal framework for autonomous vehicles, as detailed standards for operational safety and certification procedures were previously insufficient. These amendments to the Enforcement Decree, in step with the revised Autonomous Vehicles Act (effective March 20, 2025), establish standards, targets, and methods for the performance certification and conformity approval of autonomous vehicles. They also define the specific technical, managerial, and physical measures required of entities that have received conformity approval, the post-management obligations for those who have obtained performance certification, and the methods and procedures for designating a dedicated agency (Articles 35-2 to 35-12). 2. Key Details of the Amendments to the Enforcement Decree A. Specification of the Performance Certification System for Autonomous Vehicles (addition of Article 35-2 and Appendix 4-2) The requirement to obtain performance certification from the MOLIT now applies to autonomous vehicles for which no vehicle safety standards exist for their autonomous driving systems under the 「Motor Vehicle Management Act」, fully autonomous vehicles, and motor vehicles under the 「Motor Vehicle Management Act」(excluding two-wheeled vehicles). To receive performance certification, a vehicle must be equipped with the structure and devices necessary to perform autonomous driving functions, such as display, warning, and control devices, and must possess the required performance capabilities related to operation within its operational design domain, lane-keeping, and speed control. An applicant seeking performance certification is required to submit a performance certification application and related documents to the Minister of Land, Infrastructure and Transport; upon receiving an application, the Minister shall grant the performance certification after conducting a ‘type confirmation’ to verify that the vehicle’s type conforms to performance certification standards, and a ‘production inspection’ to check that it has been manufactured, assembled, or imported identically to that type. The performance certification standards follow the device and performance requirements prescribed in Appendix 4-2.1 B. Specification of the Conformity Approval System for Autonomous Vehicles (addition of Article 35-4 and Appendix 4-3) The ‘Conformity Approval’ system, required for the actual on-road operation by those who have received performance certification, has been specified. The criteria for conformity approval have been specifically defined, requiring that the operational purpose, use, scope, and road types must align with or be included within the autonomous vehicle’s operational design domain. Eligibility for conformity approval is limited to corporate entities and institutions with a public-interest and transport function (such as public agencies and corporations in the passenger and freight transport sectors) in consideration of, inter alia, their safety management capabilities. Eligible applicants must submit an application to MOLIT along with an operational plan that outlines details such as the operational purpose, use, scope, and maximum speed. MOLIT conducts a comprehensive evaluation of the operational plan's purpose, route, and communication/road environment, which includes a documentary assessment and, if necessary, an on-site inspection. The standards for conformity approval are set forth in Appendix 4-3.2 C. Modifications to and Cancellation of Performance Certification and Conformity Approval (Addition of Articles 35-3, 35-5, and 35-6) Sanction criteria for performance certification have been differentially established based on the number of violations. For instance, if a vehicle fails to meet performance certification standards or if its safe operation is hindered by design, manufacturing, or performance issues, a warning is issued for the first violation, while the performance certification is subject to cancellation for a second or subsequent violation. Sanction criteria for conformity approval have also been differentially established based on the number of violations. A first violation of the approval conditions or period results in a 15-day operational suspension, a second violation results in a 30-day suspension, and a third or subsequent violation leads to the cancellation of the conformity approval. If the Minister of Land, Infrastructure and Transport cancels a performance certification or conformity approval, the cancellation must be promptly announced on the official website and the concerned party must be notified. D. Strengthened Responsibilities for Holders of Conformity Approval (Addition of Article 35-7) Those who have received conformity approval must purchase an insurance policy or enter into a mutual aid agreement under the 「Compulsory Motor Vehicle Liability Security Act」 and must retain data recorded by the accident data recorder and the autonomous driving information recorder for at least six months. Holders of conformity approval must implement necessary technical, managerial, and physical measures for the safe operation of autonomous vehicles, including: (i) pre-operation safety checks and monitoring of the autonomous vehicle; (ii) appointing a safety manager to perform tasks such as monitoring driving conditions; (iii) establishing emergency response procedures for accidents or hazardous situations; and (iv) preventing unauthorized access and reporting any accidents to MOLIT. E. Post-Management Measures by Vehicle Manufacturers (Addition of Article 35-8) Manufacturers of autonomous vehicles, etc. must provide post-management measures, such as supplying parts, offering free repairs, and providing maintenance technology, for defects that occur within a specified period or mileage. F. Designation of a Dedicated Agency and Fees, etc. (Addition of Article 35-12) When designating a dedicated agency for tasks such as performance certification and conformity approval, MOLIT must review whether the candidate has the necessary dedicated organization and professional personnel to perform these duties before making its decision. Once designated, the fact must be announced in the official gazette or on the ministry's website. The dedicated agency may receive fees after submitting a proposal to MOLIT for approval, which must include the types of fees, rates, calculation standards, and collection methods and procedures. Further details are provided in Article 31 of the Enforcement Rule. 3. Implications These amendments to the Enforcement Decree establish the specific details of a dual-track procedure for autonomous vehicles, comprising 'Performance Certification' and 'Conformity Approval'. This approach is interpreted as an effort to secure both technical safety and reliability in an actual operational environment. Manufacturers and transport operators must ensure thorough compliance with the procedural obligations for performance certification and conformity approval by adhering to the detailed provisions and using the forms prescribed in the amended Enforcement Degree and the associated Enforcement Rule, while also continuing to monitor subsequent legislation and guidelines. *** LIN has extensive experience in providing advisory and litigation services in the mobility industry, particularly in areas such as administrative regulations and patent and trade secret disputes related to motor vehicles. Our Mobility Team consists of attorneys and experts with a distinctive interest and passion for automobiles. Should you wish to learn more about this newsletter or have any other inquiries, please do not hesitate to contact our firm’s Mobility Team 1. These are categorized as general standards, structural and device standards, and performance standards; the detailed criteria for performance certification, along with related forms such as the performance certification application (including the application for modification) and the performance certificate, are stipulated in Articles 21 and 22 of the Enforcement Rule and their corresponding attached forms. 2. These are categorized by the criteria of operational design domain conformity, on-road operation conformity, communication conformity, and information provision conformity; the detailed standards for conformity approval, as well as related forms such as the conformity approval application (including the application for modification) and the conformity approval certificate, are stipulated in Articles 23 and 24 of the Enforcement Rule and their corresponding attached forms.2025.06.30
-
NoticeLIN Successfully Hosts “Doing Business in Korea” Seminar for Utah Business DelegationOn June 18, 2025, LIN hosted a successful seminar titled “Doing Business in Korea” for a visiting business delegation from the State of Utah, USA. In his opening remarks, Managing Partner Jin Seok Lim highlighted Korea’s world-class infrastructure, stable legal and regulatory systems, highly educated workforce, and strategic location in Northeast Asia. He noted that these advantages make Korea an attractive destination for companies across a range of sectors, including technology, healthcare, consumer goods, and advanced manufacturing. The first session featured David Yang, who introduced LIN’s Foreign Investment Advisory Team and discussed various entry models tailored to Korea. These included agency, distributorship, franchise, joint venture, and subsidiary establishment. He outlined the pros and cons of each model, depending on the desired level of market presence and commitment. In the second session, Taejoon Bae delivered a presentation on Korea’s regulatory environment for foreign investors, with a focus on the Monopoly Regulation and Fair Trade Act and the Distribution Industry Development Act. He shared practical insights on legal issues commonly encountered in the distribution of imported goods and offered strategies for risk mitigation and regulatory compliance. The Q&A session saw enthusiastic engagement from members of the Utah delegation, generating thoughtful discussion on the operational realities of entering the Korean market. Attendees welcomed the seminar as a valuable opportunity for practical guidance and legal insight. In closing, Dong Soo Chung, Director of WTC Utah Korea, remarked, “This seminar offered timely and practical guidance for Utah companies preparing to enter the Korean market, particularly as direct flights between Incheon and Salt Lake City open new doors for bilateral exchange. We look forward to deepening cooperation between Korea and Utah.”2025.06.30
-
Recruitment PersonnelNew RecruitmentsWe are pleased to welcome Jung Bong Lee (Partner), Lance B. Lee (Foreign Legal Consultant - Partner), and Ki Suk Seol (Of Counsel) as new members of our Firm. 1. Jeong Bong Lee, Partner - Incheon Songdo High School(68th) - Yonsei University, Department of Law - Chungnam National University, School of Law - Korean Bar Examination (40th, 1998) - Judicial Research and Training Institute (27th) - University of Vienna – Criminal Justice Institute Visiting Scholar (2008) Past) Incheon District Public Prosecutors’ Office – Prosecutor (2001) Past) Daejeon District Public Prosecutors’ Office, Hongseong Branch – Prosecutor (2003) Past) Incheon District Public Prosecutors’ Office, Bucheon Branch – Prosecutor (2005) Past) Seoul Central District Public Prosecutors’ Office – Prosecutor (2007) Past) Supreme Prosecutors’ Office - Prosecutor Researcher (2007) Past) Busan District Public Prosecutors’ Office – Prosecutor (2013) Past) Financial Intelligence Unit (FIU) - Head of Strategic Analytics (2014) Past) Chuncheon District Public Prosecutors’ Office, Gangneung Branch – Chief Prosecutor (2016) Past) Daegu District Public Prosecutors’ Office, Seobu Branch – Chief Prosecutor, Criminal Division 3 (2017) Past) Seoul Eastern District Public Prosecutors’ Office - Chief Prosecutor, Criminal Division 5 (2018) Past) Seoul Southern District Public Prosecutors’ Office - Chief Prosecutor, Criminal Division 2 (2019) Past) Supreme Prosecutors’ Office – Human Rights Policy Officer (2020) Past) Gwangju District Public Prosecutors’ Office – Human Rights Protection Officer (2021) Past) Chuncheon District Public Prosecutors’ Office – Chief of Wonju Branch (2022) Past) Seoul High Prosecutors’ Office (Daegu District Public Prosecutors’ Office, Secondment(2023), Voluntary Resignation) Current) LIN Since his appointment as a prosecutor in 2001, Mr. Lee has served as a prosecutor at the Seoul Central District Prosecutors' Office, a researcher at the Supreme Prosecutors' Office, a prosecutor at the Busan District Prosecutors' Office, a secondee at the Financial Intelligence Unit (FIU), a deputy prosecutor at the Seoul Eastern and Southern District Prosecutors' Offices, and a human rights policy officer at the Supreme Prosecutors' Office, before finally retiring in 2023 as the Chief Prosecutor of the Wonju District Prosecutors' Office. During his 22 years and 8 months as a prosecutor, he discharged a wide range of cases, including intellectual property infringement, technology theft and unfair competition, medical malpractice, sexual assault, finance, taxation, homicide, special crime, public security, and human rights policy (due process compliance in investigations). Mr. Lee, who joined Lin as a partner in November 2023, plans to actively engage in various cases such as securities, finance, and corporate anti-corruption based on diverse investigative and theoretical experience accumulated from the prosecution. Lin boasts top domestic experts in responding to financial, corporate crimes, and other investigative matters, and we will strive to provide our clients with high-quality legal services. 2. Lance B. Lee, Foreign Legal Consultant (Partner) - Boston College Law School – J.D. - University of Virginia – B.A. Past) Dentons Lee - Chief Operating Officer, Head of International Arbitration & Litigation and Partner, 2012-2023 Past) Kim & Chang - Partner Past) STX Shipbuilding Corporation – Group General Counsel Past) POSCO – Overseas Projects Team Leader Past) U.S. Army JAG Corps – Trial Counsel, Prosecutor and Captain Past) Gainer, Rient & Hotis - Attorney Current) LIN – Head of International Arbitration & Litigation, Partner (Present) Mr. Lee, a U.S. attorney, was responsible for various international arbitration and litigation cases for 11 years at Kim & Chang, representing numerous international corporations and diverse fields. Serving as General Counsel at STX Shipbuilding Corporation and Head of the International Legal Team at POSCO, he handled tasks such as international arbitration, international litigation, IP, corporate M&A, contract negotiations, and joint investments for global conglomerates. Subsequently, as a partner at the Seoul Office of Dentons, he worked for 11 years as the Head of the International Arbitration/Litigation Team, leading numerous international arbitration cases as lead counsel. In 2024, for the first time in history, more than half of the global population will be holding elections, signaling the end of America’s “unilateral hegemony” and prompting the world to prepare for more disputes. With major industrial powers intensifying their industrial policies and protectionist measures to secure leadership in advanced and eco-friendly industries post-election, there is an anticipated increase in international disputes, particularly in advanced technology sectors such as semiconductors and information technology (IT). Mr. Lee, a foreign attorney leading the International Arbitration/Litigation Team, will leverage his experience and expertise to actively discharge legal advice on the prevention and resolution of international disputes for various global corporations based on his accumulated knowledge and professionalism. 3. Ki Suk Seol, Of Counsel - Hongik University, Department of Architecture - Kyungpook National University, Graduate School of Law, - KAIST, Intellectual Property Graduate School - Bar Examination (3rd) Past) Eland Group, Legal Department Past) Hyundai Engineering, Legal Department Past) Ministry of Justice, Legal Affairs Officer Past) Ministry of Justice, Legal Affairs Secretary Current) LIN Mr. Seol, as an in-house counsel for a large corporation, has accumulated expertise in a wide range of legal affairs that can arise within the company, including civil and criminal litigation and consultation, fair trade practices, compliance, intellectual property, construction, and labor-related dispute management. Subsequently, serving as a Legal Affairs Secretary at the Ministry of Justice, he handled administrative adjudication and litigation, legislation drafting and revision, interpretation of laws and rights, review of government and legislative bills, formulation of legislative strategies, improvement of attorney and notary systems, and enhancement of legal technology systems. Through these roles, he has built expertise in planning, administration, and legislation. Amidst the ongoing challenges such as the increase in unsold and unoccupied properties, rising construction costs, high interest rates, and stagnation in real estate PF, it is anticipated that legal disputes and litigation among real estate market participants, including developers, contractors, financial institutions, trustees, and local housing associations, will continue to rise. Mr. Seol, who has served as an in-house counsel for a global integrated construction company, has handled a wide range of cases from civil and criminal matters to fair trade, construction, labor, and compliance issues, from the client's perspective, collaborating with various major law firms. Drawing upon his extensive practical experience accumulated in the field, he is committed to providing tailored solutions, not only advisory services but also litigation support, to corporate clients. 4. Recruitment of Foreign Lawyer With recent concerns over deflation in China, attitudes of Korean companies towards China have become notably cautious. Consequently, there is a growing need for professional advice regarding entry into the Chinese market. Recognizing this demand, Lin has recently recruited Ms. Wenpu Yang (Chinese attorney), aiming to provide high-quality legal service that aligns with our clients’ business strategies and management objectives on various issues related to Sino-Korean business relations. Going forward, Lin promises to continuously recruit verified talents in various fields to ensure customer satisfaction.2024.02.05
[LIN] Employment structures in South Korean Labour Law
In Korean, the phrase for forming a relationship is “gwanggye-reul maetneunda”, which literally means “to tie a relationship”. In contrast, ending a relationship is expressed as “gwanggye-reul kkeuneunda”, or “to cut a relationship”.
This linguistic contrast – to cut rather than a more symmetrical term like “untie” – offers a glimpse into the emotional and social complexity surrounding the dissolution of relationships in Korean culture. While forming a bond is often harmonious and mutual, ending one can be abrupt, painful or even adversarial, hence the expression of “cutting” rather than “untying”. This idea carries over to employment relationships and, in particular, the concept of dismissal.
Legal grounds for dismissal
(1) Managerial necessity. South Korean labour law recognises two primary forms of dismissal. The first is dismissal for managerial reasons, governed by article 24 of the Labour Standards Act.
To dismiss an employee on this basis, an employer must demonstrate “urgent managerial necessity”. Procedural requirements include efforts to avoid dismissal (such as wage or hour adjustments), fair and reasonable selection criteria, and good-faith consultation with a majority employee representative or labour union.
Discriminatory practices, particularly on the basis of gender, are strictly prohibited in the act.
Case law interprets “urgent managerial necessity” narrowly. It applies only when the company is facing a severe crisis such as business closure, bankruptcy or liquidation that threatens its overall survival.
Moderate financial difficulties or department-specific restructuring generally do not meet this threshold. Objective, credible evidence must show that the company is unlikely to recover or improve its performance in the foreseeable future.
(2) Employee misconduct. The second category is disciplinary dismissal, under article 23 of the Labour Standards Act, which prohibits dismissal without “justifiable cause”. Courts define this as misconduct that renders continued employment unreasonable under prevailing social norms. Common examples include :
Criminal conduct (e.g., assault, theft, sex crimes);
Willful harm to the employer (e.g., embezzlement, breach of trust);
Chronic absenteeism or unauthorised departures; and
Fraudulent behaviour during recruitment (e.g. submitting false credentials).
(3) Poor performance. Poor performance may constitute justifiable cause, but only under stringent conditions:
Internal rules or policies, such as Rules of Employment, must explicitly recognise poor performance as grounds for dismissal :
Evaluation criteria must be objective and fairly applied;
The employee’s performance must fall significantly below minimum expectations; and
The employee must have been given a reasonable opportunity to improve, with little prospect of recovery.
While courts are gradually becoming more receptive to such cases, South Korean law remains far more restrictive than common law jurisdictions that permit “at will” termination.
Union protection
Dismissal on the grounds of union activity raises serious legal concerns. While misconduct such as property damage during union-related activities may warrant disciplinary action, such conduct must be clearly distinguishable from lawful union participation.
Under the South Korean Constitution and Trade Union and Labour Relations Adjustment Act, employees are guaranteed the rights to organise, bargain collectively and take collective action.
Any adverse employment action, including dismissal, taken solely in response to a lawful union activity constitutes unfair labour practice and may expose the employer and responsible individuals to criminal liability. Employers must be especially cautious to avoid any appearance of retaliation against union involvement.
Fixed-term employment
Under article 4 of the Act on the Protection of Fixed-Term and Part-Time Employees, the standard limit for fixed-term employment is two years. Beyond this, the employee is considered a regular, indefinite-term employee, unless the role falls within one of the statutory exceptions, such as elderly workers, professionals, or temporary replacements.
Employers must carefully assess whether a particular fixed-term arrangement qualifies as an exception. Extending a contract beyond two years without such qualification risks automatic conversion to regular employment, subject to all associated protections, including the requirement of just cause for dismissal.
Indirect, flexible arrangements
In response to the strict regulations on employee dismissal, many companies turn to more flexible employment structures such as outsourcing, freelancing and in-house subcontracting. Estimates suggest that one to three million workers are currently engaged under such alternative arrangements.
The labour law draws a strict distinction between sub-contracting and dispatch work:
Sub-contracting involves outsourcing a specific task or result; and
Dispatching involves the supply of manpower.
The Act on the Protection of Dispatched Workers limits dispatch work to certain roles and caps its duration at two years. If an arrangement is classified as illegal dispatch, the principal employer may face criminal penalties and be required to hire the worker directly.
Furthermore, if there is discriminatory treatment in working conditions, such as disparities in salary between sub-contracted workers and regular employees performing the same or substantially similar tasks, the employer may be held liable for the retroactive payment of the wage difference.
On the other hand, to maintain a legally valid sub-contracting relationship:
The sub-contractor must be operationally independent, with its own workforce and management systems;
Work must be assigned, supervised and evaluated by the sub-contractor, not the main contractor; and
The main contractor may evaluate the outcomes of the sub-contracted work, but must not interfere with how the individual sub-contracted workers carry out their tasks.
In practice, sub-contracted workers often work side-by-side with regular employees, making strict separation difficult. Even indirect control such as giving instructions through internal communication tools, or real-time monitoring, may result in reclassification as an illegal dispatch under the labour law.
Freelancers, platform workers
Historically, freelancers included individuals like delivery drivers, insurance agents, golf course caddies and private tutors. But in recent years, the rise of the IT industry and platform economy has dramatically expanded freelance work into areas like web development, digital design and remote consulting.
A key legal issue is control and supervision. If a platform dictates work schedules, scope and payment, the freelancer may be reclassified as an employee. In a landmark 2024 Supreme Court decision, a ride-hailing platform driver was found to be an employee due to its control over his working hours, rules and compensation.
Legislative efforts are underway to extend full labour rights – including unionisation and collective bargaining – to platform workers.
Practical issues, strategies
Despite comparatively rigid labour regulations, employers have a variety of lawful options to navigate the employment relationship.
Probationary period. Employers may retain discretion by clearly stating that final employment is subject to a probationary period, typically up to three months. If properly implemented, this provides flexibility in early termination decisions.
Voluntary resignation. South Korean courts do not apply the constructive dismissal doctrine as broadly as many Western jurisdictions. If an employee formally resigns, even under subtle pressure, courts generally refrain from reclassifying the resignation as an unlawful dismissal. This provides companies with some latitude in offering voluntary resignation programmes.
Conclusion
For global companies operating in South Korea, compliance with local labour laws is not only a legal necessity, but also a practical imperative.
Encouragingly, access to information and legal support has become more accessible in recent years, with many law firms offering tailored services for foreign-invested businesses.
Crucially, building constructive and culturally informed labour management relationships is key. Understanding the values that underpin the employment culture – such as diligence, integrity and mutual respect – can help companies foster stability, trust and long-term success in this market.
Please refer to the original article below.
Asia Business Law Journal
View original article▼
https://law.asia/employment-structures-in-south-korean-labour-law/
LIN Launches Legal Response Center for Creditors Affected by TMAP Incident’ and Accepts Opinions from Affected Merchants
LIN has recently launched the “Legal Response Center for Creditors Affected by TMAP Incident” for small business merchants (sellers) affected by the TMON-Wemap mass settlement delay.
“It seems more likely that the bankruptcy court and the debtor will apply the Autonomous Restructuring Support (ARS) program without initiating the debtor's rehabilitation proceedings,” said Attorney Hyojong Choi (34th class of the Judicial Research and Training Instiutte), the head of the center, and TMON and Wemap followed Choi's prediction by initiating the ARS program and negotiating with creditors before the decision to initiate rehabilitation.
Attorney Hyojong Choi of LIN are preparing to reflect the opinions of sellers on these platforms to protect creditors' rights throughout the ARS program and subsequent rehabilitation procedures. On August 6, they agreed to jointly respond to the overall ARS procedures in cooperation with Attorney Junseop Shim of SIM Law Firm. Attorney Hyokong Choi served as an external researcher of the ARS System Improvement TF of the Seoul Bankruptcy Court and is currently a corporate bankruptcy trustee of the same court. He has experience in a number of recent major corporate rehabilitation cases, including those of ISTA Airlines, Ssangyong Motors, and Mesh Korea, and has expertise in the entire corporate rehabilitation proceedings, including the ARS process.
The Legal Response Center for Creditors Affected by TMAP Incident will provide detailed advisory services on how to protect creditors, including small business owners associated with TMON and Wemap, based on LIN's extensive experience in responding to rehabilitation proceedings on the side of the creditors. In the early stages of the ARS process, the center is recruiting sellers to deliver their opinions to the 'Rehabilitation Proceedings Council' scheduled for August 13. Considering the seriousness of the situation as many merchants and consumers have been affected by the incident, participation in the council stage will be free of charge, with minimal fees for future responses. If you need assistance, please fill out the attached form and contact Attorneys Hyojong Choi (hjchoi@law-lin.com).
Recruitment of Affected Seller Clients▼
https://docs.google.com/forms/d/19tW3Bnz4_Bef5vZDcrYONXMR4d2i7Mcn3CF3HkzIyks/edit
Please see below for related articles.
BLOTER & Herald Business
View original article▼
https://n.news.naver.com/article/293/0000057019
https://biz.heraldcorp.com/article/3447872
Attorney Seung Bok Na of LIN, published “50 Golf Course Incidents You Might Encounter” (Pakyoungsa)
On September 5, 2024, Attorney Seung Bok Na published a book entitled “50 Golf Course Incidents You May Encounter (subtitle: Law and Wisdom explained by a Lawyer Who Is Serious About Golf).”
Na has been involved with golf-related organizations as an auditor of the Korea Golf Industry Association, and he often participates in discussions at golf-related seminars, including the National Assembly Seminar (Dec. 19, 2023), or delivers lectures on “Golf and Law” or “Golf and Management” at CEO courses or associations. Throughout these engagements, he has developed a keen interest and passion for golf course-related cases (civil, criminal, disciplinary, licensing and permits, M&A, compliance, etc.).
From more than 400 golf-related cases and articles, he has selected noteworthy golf course-related cases (civil, criminal, disciplinary) that are likely to be of interest to golf industry stakeholders and summarized them in 1,000 words or less for easy access, and sprinkled them with classic quotes to capture the wisdom of incident prevention.
Na also included unique cases to capture the joy of the game and the human limitations of golfers, and added outrageous accidents to raise awareness of the seriousness of golf course-related accidents and combat safety apathy.
With the encouragement and support of golf industry figures, including Hyung-mo Kang, President of the Korea Golf Association (representing Yuseong CC), who wrote the book’s recommendation,, Na plans to expand his golf course-related legal practice through close exchanges and cooperation in the future.
For the original article, please refer to the links below. Thank you.
Chosun Ilbo
View original article▼
https://www.chosun.com/culture-life/book/2024/09/21/MDETAZX4DFFURGOLZUHIEVFPBM/?utm_source=naver&utm_medium=referral&utm_campaign=naver-news
jtbc golf
View original article▼
http://jtbcgolf.joins.com/news/news_view.asp?ns1=45589
