Case Studies
[IT Litigation] The Core of a Software Development Contract: Why Establishing a Clear Scope of Work is Important
If your company is conducting a software development project, you’d likely have experienced issues related to the Scope of Work. Even if everything seemed fine during the contract negotiations, unforeseen requirements may arise during development, or the expected deliverables might not be achieved. To prevent these issues, it’s essential to clearly define the scope of work in the software development contract.
Data provision contract review items and dispute cases
Law firm Veat received a request from digital healthcare platform Company A (hereinafter referred to as the "client") to review the legal aspects of the data provision contract. The client requested a comprehensive review of the data contract to minimize legal risks that may arise in the process of receiving processed data from the data provider and to establish clear rights relationships. With innovation based on data becoming a key element, various data have emerged as important resources. Law firm Veat, when the client enters into a contract to receive data, guided them to consider essential matters that require legal review, such as the assignment of data rights, scope of use, rights relationships after contract termination, types of data provided, inclusion of personal information, derivative data, third-party provision of data, and subcontracting. 1. Assignment of Data Rights It is necessary to clearly determine who the ownership and usage rights are assigned to after the data is provided. In particular, for processed data, clear provisions are needed regarding the assignment of intellectual property rights and scope of use. Dispute Cases Related to Assignment of Data Rights When an algorithm or service function is developed based on the data, the data provider may claim co-ownership of the resulting product and lead to legal disputes. 2. Scope of Use and Rights Relationships After Contract Termination The period and purpose for which the data can be used should be defined in advance, and it is also important to review whether the data should be returned or deleted after the data contract is terminated. Dispute Cases Arising from Use of Data Beyond the Defined Scope If data was specified in the data contract to be used only for "internal research and analysis purposes," but a new commercial service was developed based on it and released to the public or profits were generated, the data provider may claim a breach of the data contract. 3. Types of Data Provided and Inclusion of Personal Information The types of data being provided should be specifically defined, and if personal information is included, protective measures to comply with relevant legal regulations should be prepared. Dispute Cases Arising from Misunderstanding of Personal Information Inclusion If the data provider claims that the data is provided in an “anonymized state,” but the client recombines the data to make it re-identifiable or combines it with external data to identify individuals, legal issues may arise. 4. Derivative Data and Third-Party Provision The issue of ownership of new data created by the client by processing the data should be agreed in advance. It is also important to clearly define the possibility and conditions of third-party provision of data. Dispute Cases Related to Assignment of Derivative Data Rights When new statistical data, models, or prediction algorithms are created by analyzing processed data, disputes frequently arise as to who owns the resulting data. 5. Matters Related to Subcontracting Whether the data can be subcontracted to another company and the conditions thereof should be included in the contract to ensure safe handling of the data. Dispute Cases Related to Third-Party Provision and Subcontracting If data is provided to third parties such as external vendors, collaborators, or cloud providers without being specified in the contract, damages or legal action may arise from breach of contract. Subcontracting is also a sensitive matter. Data provision contracts are therefore very important legal documents. A data provision contract contains various legal issues such as assignment of data rights, scope of use, processing of personal information, derivative data, and third-party provision, so it is essential to review the contract carefully before signing it. Law firm Veat provides optimized legal advice to IT and startup companies. The legal challenges faced by IT companies go beyond simple contract review and include complex issues arising at the intersection of technology and law. Accordingly, Law firm Veat provides in-depth legal advice in various IT areas such as software development, data provision and data protection, and AI-related regulations. Law firm Veat provides customized data provision contract review services to meet the needs of its clients and help them minimize legal risks and provide stable services while operating a digital healthcare platform or IT company. If you need legal advice regarding data provision contracts or related matters, please contact Law firm Veat at any time. Thank you. Law firm Veat
Law firm Veat, An Il-woon partner lawyer, appointed as advisor of the Korea Cartoon and Animation Society.
March 18, 2025, the Korea Association of Cartoon and Animation is establishing the 15th Advisory Committee and has appointed Partner Attorney An Il-woon of Law firm Veat (hereinafter “Attorney An Il-woon”) as an advisor. This appointment of advisor was prepared to expand the participation of experts in academic and institutional discussions for the development of the cartoon & animation industry and academic progress, and numerous experts, including Attorney An Il-woon, along with academic and industry representatives, have been appointed as advisors. Attorney An Il-woon, who has been active as a Community Expert of the Korea Copyright Commission and a professional trainer specializing in open-source SW licenses, is expected to contribute to various institutional discussions for industrial development and right protection based on his abundant advisory experience in legal fields closely related to the cartoon & animation industry, such as copyright and licensing. Notably, Attorney An Il-woon is also active as a Community Expert of the Korea Copyright Commission and a professional trainer specializing in open-source SW licenses, and is a core member of the Law firm Veat TIP (Technology Intellectual Property) team specializing in copyright and content industry legal consultation. Based on his experience providing copyright-related legal consultation to various institutions and companies, he has presented practical solutions for the protection of creators' rights and the balanced development of the industry ecosystem. Since its founding in 2001, the Korea Association of Cartoon and Animation has established an academic foundation for the domestic cartoon & animation industry, broadened the intersection of creation and research, and has been a leading academic organization that seeks interdisciplinary cooperation in response to the era of convergence content. The Advisory Committee plays a role in advising the association's policy proposals, research planning, and institutional improvements, and serves as a bridge connecting the voices of the industry to academia and institutions. Attorney An Il-woon’s appointment is expected to serve as an opportunity to combine the expertise and practical know-how of Law firm Veat in the content industry, particularly in creative-based industries such as webtoons, animation, and games, with academic and policy discussions. For the next two years, from January 1, 2025, to December 31, 2026, Attorney An Il-woon will actively participate in the association's advisory and research processes as an advisor and will contribute to the sustainable development of the content industry and the improvement of legal systems. Thank you. Law firm Veat
Law firm Veat, Ju-hyeong Senior Fellow, "Domestic export food needs to redesign labels and advertisements to meet FDA standards."
Law firm Veat's Lee Joo-hyeong, Global Food Industry Expert, contributed a column titled ‘Changes and Opportunities for Food Companies Due to the GLP-1 Typhoon’ to the Food and Beverage News. The following is a summary of the column, and those who are interested in the full text should refer to the link at the bottom. Food products targeting GLP-1 users must comply with the strict regulations of the US FDA and USDA. Product composition focuses on nutrient content and health claims. For example, Nestle's Vital Pursuit aims to solve nutritional deficiencies in users by increasing protein and fiber content and reducing calories. However, directly labeling it as "for GLP-1 users" can be mistaken for a drug, so instead, nutrient content claims such as "high protein" and "nutritional balance" are used. This complies with FDA labeling regulations and avoids controversy over exaggeration. On the label, the boundary between health claims and structure/function claims is important. A health claim such as "helps with weight loss" requires scientific evidence and FDA approval, but a structure/function claim such as "supports satiety" is relatively flexibly applicable. Companies are choosing the latter to reduce regulatory burdens. For example, Vital Pursuit labeled it as "suitable for weight management" instead of "GLP-1." Advertising is subject to FTC regulations. To claim a direct association with GLP-1 drugs, reliable scientific evidence is required, otherwise it can be considered false advertising. Nestle avoids mentioning drugs in TV commercials or social media and instead emphasizes the message of "healthy eating companion." Advertising using influencers must clearly disclose financial relationships, and overstating weight loss effects can lead to legal risks. Korean companies exporting to markets such as the United States should pay attention to a few things. Law firm Veat’s Lee Joo-hyeong, Expert is actively engaged based on his legal expertise as a Doctor of Law and a deep understanding of domestic and international food safety and regulatory fields. He served as an adjunct professor at the Graduate School of Food Safety Regulatory Science at Chung-Ang University and Director of the Policy Research Lab at the Food Safety Information Agency, and is currently actively engaged as Head of the Global Food Industry Support Division and Expert at Law firm Veat. Furthermore, he participates as an expert in various government agencies and academic organizations, including the Future Medical Expedition Future Prediction Committee of the Ministry of Health and Welfare, the Food Safety Policy Committee of the State Council, the Self-Regulation Review Committee of the MFDS, and the Food Science and Technology Association Food Policy/Law Division Secretary, and holds qualifications such as US FSVP-QI, PCHF–PCQI/FSPCA, and provides in-depth expertise in global food industry regulations. Law firm Veat provides professional legal advice based on broad legal knowledge regarding various legal issues related to the increasingly growing food service industry. In addition, it provides in-depth advice on legal matters related to food service operations, such as food regulations compliance and contract drafting, and supports companies preparing or operating health functional foods, food, and pharmaceutical businesses to check legal risks in advance and operate businesses stably. If you need advice on agricultural and food industry regulations, please contact Law firm Veat. [Go to] [Lee Joo-hyeong's Global Food Trends] Changes and Opportunities for Food Companies Due to the GLP-1 Typhoon Thank you. Law firm Veat
Could it be possible to grant stock options to external specialists? Stock option grant recipients and legal grant methods.
Law firm Veat received a request from cosmetics manufacturer A (hereinafter "the client") to review the possibility of granting stock options to external professionals. The client wanted to establish a system where external professionals, serving as long-term partners by performing outsourced services, could become shareholders of the client, grow together, and share profits based on the results. They requested a review to determine if granting stock options to external professionals was possible. Considering that the client's external professionals were separately conducting their own businesses in addition to the company’s work, making it difficult to become employees, Law firm Veat reviewed the eligibility for stock options and the legal feasibility of granting them and provided our opinion. A stock option (Stock Option) is a system whereby a company grants employees or specific targets the right to purchase its own shares under certain conditions. This is an important incentive measure that primarily encourages long-term contributions from employees and ensures that the company and its employees have the same interests. The stock option system is an effective method for employees to become shareholders of the company, grow with the company, and share its performance. Stock Option Eligibility According to domestic Commercial Code and the [Special Measures Act for the Promotion of Venture Businesses] (hereinafter "the Venture Special Act"), the principle is that stock options can only be granted to "individuals who can become shareholders," that is, to the company’s employees. Therefore, it is generally impossible to grant stock options to external individuals who are not employees. However, according to Article 16 of the Venture Special Act, if the company is subject to the Venture Special Act, stock options can be granted to external professionals who contribute to the company’s growth through technology development, research, or management. Legal Issues Regarding Stock Options for External Professionals If external professionals are operating their own businesses while performing work for the company, it may be difficult to register them as employees. Particularly, for external individuals to be granted stock options under the Venture Special Act, it must be proven that the external professional has actually contributed to the company's growth, which may be difficult to demonstrate with a typical outsourced service contract. Therefore, the company needs to evaluate the specific performance and contribution of the external professional to prove their contribution. In addition, a board resolution must be passed to grant stock options, and in some cases, shareholder approval may also be required. Furthermore, to ensure legal stability, the stock option contract should clearly define the exercise conditions, such as allowing exercise after a certain period or when specific goals are achieved. Alternatives for Stock Option Grants If granting stock options to external professionals is legally difficult or uncertain, the company can consider various alternatives. For example, they can consider granting shares in a manner that meets certain legal requirements or providing compensation based on performance. They can also adjust the contractual structure to establish a more stable cooperative relationship. However, each alternative must be carefully reviewed for legal requirements, and the appropriate method may vary depending on the company’s situation. It is important to seek professional advice when considering legal reviews regarding stock option grants and alternative measures. To proceed with a cooperative relationship with external professionals legally safely, the company must find the most appropriate method within the company’s long-term goals and within the legal boundaries, and legal advice is essential for this. While stock options are a useful tool for companies and key personnel to grow together in the long term, they must meet legal requirements and their feasibility must be carefully reviewed. Law firm Veat provides legal advice to resolve complex legal issues faced by companies and to provide the most efficient alternative solutions. We review not only a precise understanding of stock option grants but also alternative legal measures, design the optimal stock option structure tailored to the company’s situation, and support minimizing legal risks. If you need a customized legal consultation regarding stock options, please feel free to contact Law firm Veat. Thank you. Law firm Veat
[202503] Monthly Veat March Issue_ Things Companies and Employees Should Check When Changing Jobs and Starting a Business Regarding the Unfair Competition Prevention Act ✍️
Okay, here's the translation of the text from the provided URL, adhering to your specific instructions (Veat for 비트, Law firm Veat for 법무법인 비트, preserving HTML tags, no markdown). ```html 안녕하세요. 저희 Law firm Veat는 고객의 성공적인 비즈니스를 위한 최상의 법률 서비스를 제공하는 데 전념하고 있습니다. 저희는 다양한 산업 분야에 걸쳐 복잡한 법적 문제에 대한 전문적인 솔루션을 제공합니다. 저희의 주요 서비스는 다음과 같습니다: 계약 검토 및 협상 지적 재산권 보호 분쟁 해결 및 소송 대리 기업 자문 및 구조 부동산 거래 저희의 변호사들은 각 분야에서 풍부한 경험과 전문성을 갖추고 있으며, 고객의 니즈에 맞는 맞춤형 법률 서비스를 제공합니다. 저희는 고객과의 신뢰를 최우선으로 생각하며, 투명하고 효율적인 서비스를 제공하기 위해 노력합니다. 궁금한 점이 있거나 법률 자문이 필요하시면 언제든지 문의해 주세요. 감사합니다. Law firm Veat 드림 ``` **Translation:** ```html Hello. We, Law firm Veat, are dedicated to providing the best legal services for our clients’ successful businesses. We provide professional solutions to complex legal issues across various industries. Our main services include: Contract review and negotiation Intellectual property protection Dispute resolution and litigation Corporate advisory and structuring Real estate transactions Our lawyers have extensive experience and expertise in each field and provide customized legal services tailored to our clients’ needs. We prioritize trust with our clients and strive to provide transparent and efficient services. If you have any questions or need legal advice, please feel free to contact us. Thank you. Sincerely, Law firm Veat ```
[IT Litigation] Key Points to Note When Entering Secondary Derivative Work Contracts for Webtoons and Web Novels
Recently, the webtoon and web novel industries have grown rapidly, and secondary works (e.g., dramas, games, movies, etc.) based on these works are being actively utilized. Consequently, the number of legal disputes related to the ownership and transfer of copyrights and copyright property rights is increasing. A significant number of copyright disputes arise from contracts entered into between the original copyright holder and the business entity. This is because the distribution of copyright property rights and the resulting economic benefits is determined by the content of these contracts. Therefore, when entering into a contract regarding the ownership and use of copyright property rights for webtoons, web novels, etc., a thorough review of the specific terms of the contract is necessary. Under the Copyright Act, copyright property rights mean the right of the copyright holder to exclusively utilize their creation, and unlike copyright of authorship, the copyright holder can assign or license their copyright property rights to others. The right to create secondary works is a type of copyright property right, so in the case of webtoons or web novels, the original copyright holder may hold the right to create secondary works, but they may also transfer this right to a specific entity through a contract with a publisher or platform. When a third party, such as a company, enters into a contract with the original copyright holder regarding the utilization of copyright property rights, such as the right to create secondary works, the scope of the contractual rights and obligations of the parties should be clearly defined to prevent future disputes. A typical example of a copyright property rights dispute is the dispute between the late artist Lee Woo-young, the artist of the “nation’s cartoon” <Black Rubber Shoes>, and the publisher. The cartoon <Black Rubber Shoes> was created with different writers and artists, so it was a case with multiple stakeholders in a single work. In such cases, when entering into a contract related to the use of the scope of copyright property rights, the amount of money, and the settlement method, it must be specified in detail. However, in the <Black Rubber Shoes> related business rights assignment contract entered into by the late artist Lee Woo-young and the publisher, the main content such as the scope of business, the amount of money, and the settlement method were not clearly stated, which seems to be the trigger for the dispute due to differences in the parties’ understanding of the contract interpretation.
Legal review of licensing agreements for the use of trademark for sustainable business
Law firm Veat received a request from an electronic commerce enterprise (hereinafter referred to as "client") dealing in toys and other goods, to review a merchandise licensing agreement and provide legal advice. The client had entered into a licensing agreement with an external company to utilize trademark and design rights of a specific brand for product sales, but these rights expire upon termination of the agreement. To prevent potential legal issues after termination, the client requested Law firm Veat to review the licensing agreement and provide legal advice. Law firm Veat first meticulously analyzed the client’s existing merchandise licensing agreement, focusing especially on the issue of rights ownership after termination of the agreement. According to the existing agreement, the client could no longer use the design rights and copyrights after termination of the agreement, and a violation of this could result in legal risks. Law firm Veat proposed to the client two options to allow continued use of existing trademarks and designs after the agreement’s termination: ▲ negotiating with the existing rights holder to extend the licensing period or redefine the scope of rights, and ▲ entering into a new agreement to clearly define the usage rights. In this process, Law firm Veat presented realistic alternatives, considering both the client’s business needs and legal stability. In the electronic commerce market, brand image and design, not just product quality, act as key elements that determine competitiveness. Especially given the active sale of products utilizing popular characters, brand logos, and design rights, licensing agreements are important, and proactive review of potential legal issues after termination of the agreement is necessary. Therefore, it is important to clearly define the usage conditions of intellectual property (IP) rights, such as trademark rights, design rights, and copyrights, when entering into an agreement, and to comprehensively review the rights relationship after termination of the agreement. It is recommended to have a legal review conducted before entering into an agreement with the assistance of legal experts experienced in copyright law. Law firm Veat is strengthening intellectual property legal advice with a focus on Oh Seungjong, a lawyer with a deep understanding of copyright cases, and lawyers with expertise in IT and intellectual property provide legal advice and litigation related to copyright, trademarks, and unfair competition law. Through this case, Law firm Veat provided the client with practical legal advice to block legal risks in advance and to enable stable business operations even after termination of the agreement. Especially, the issue of rights ownership that may arise after termination of a licensing agreement is an important factor directly related to the sustainability of a business, and Law firm Veat supports the thorough review and preparation of countermeasures for this issue. If you need intellectual property legal advice, including licensing, please contact Law firm Veat. You can also find this case study on the Law firm Veat blog. - Legal Review of Merchandise Licensing Agreement for Sustainable Business Thank you. Sincerely, Law firm Veat
[Law firm Veat] The era of AI-based customized health functional foods! Examining domestic and international market trends, innovative cases, and outlook.
Law firm Veat ‘AI-based customized health functional foods’ regarding domestic and international market trends, innovative cases, prospects, etc. has contributed a column to Platum, a startup-specialized media platform.
"What is the impact on my business of the Specific Financial Information Act and the Virtual Asset User Protection Act?"
Law firm Veat recently provided legal advice to a company operating a web3 platform (hereinafter referred to as the "customer") regarding its obligations under laws and regulations such as the 「Act on Protecting Users of Virtual Assets」 (hereinafter referred to as the "Virtual Asset User Protection Act") and what points to pay attention to in order to comply with them. 1. Determination of Virtual Asset Business Operator Status Act on Reporting and Use of Specific Financial Transaction Information (hereinafter referred to as the "Specific Financial Transaction Information Act") Article 2 (Definitions) The meanings of the terms used in this Act are as follows. 1. "Financial institution, etc." means the following: ha. Virtual asset business operator as defined in Article 2(2) of the 「Act on Protecting Users of Virtual Assets」 (hereinafter referred to as "virtual asset business operator"). Virtual Asset User Protection Act Article 2 (Definitions) The meanings of the terms used in this Act are as follows. 2. "Virtual asset business operator" means a person who engages in any of the following acts as a business: a. The act of selling or buying (hereinafter referred to as "trading") virtual assets b. The act of exchanging virtual assets for other virtual assets c. The act of transferring virtual assets as specified by Presidential Decree d. The act of custodying or managing virtual assets e. The act of brokering, arranging, or acting on behalf of the acts in subparagraphs a and b. A "virtual asset business operator" who is subject to the regulations of the Specific Financial Transaction Information Act means a person who engages in the act of selling or buying virtual assets as a business. Regarding the term "a person who engages in it as a business," the Supreme Court has generally stated that "engaging in it" means repeatedly and continuously engaging in the same act for the purpose of profit (referring to Supreme Court Decision 98Da10793, July 10, 2000), and whether or not "engaging in it" is deemed, should be considered comprehensively, taking into account the presence or absence of repetition, continuity, business nature, purpose, scale, number of times, period, and disposition, in accordance with social norms (referring to Supreme Court Decision 2012Da86525, June 14, 2012). In particular, according to the “Virtual Asset Business Operator Reporting Manual” published by the Financial Intelligence Unit and the Financial Supervisory Service in February 2021, acts of trading virtual assets for one’s own benefit (P2P, etc.), one-time acts, and acts of simply providing a platform without charging a fee are excluded from virtual asset business operators. Law firm Veat, based on a thorough understanding of the customer's business model, reviewed whether the customer's business activities constituted trading or buying virtual assets, and provided legal advice on whether the customer's virtual asset-related business activities could be deemed to be engaged in as a business, taking into account the Supreme Court’s precedents and the Financial Supervisory Service’s position. 2. If the Customer is a Virtual Asset Business Operator: Customer Identification Duty Specific Financial Transaction Information Act Article 5(2) Customer Identification Duty of Financial Institution, etc. ① Financial institution, etc. shall take reasonable care to take the measures according to the following subdivisions to prevent money laundering acts and public blackmail funding provision, by use of financial transactions, etc. The financial institution, etc. shall write and operate a business guideline for this purpose. 3. If the customer is a virtual asset business operator: shall confirm the following items a. Items a or b of Article 1 or Article 1, subsection 2 b. Matters regarding compliance with Article 7(1) and Article 7(2) c. Matters regarding acceptance of notifications under Article 7(3) d. Matters regarding the forced cancellation of notifications or amended notifications under Article 7(4) e. Matters regarding the compliance of the following 1) or 2) 1) Management of deposits (means money received from a customer of a virtual asset business operator in connection with virtual asset transactions) separately from proprietary assets (means the virtual asset business operator's own assets) 2) Acquisition of information protection management system certification under Article 22 of the "Act on Promotion of Information Communication Network Utilization and Protection of Information" or Article 32-2 of the "Personal Information Protection Act" (hereinafter referred to as “information protection management system certification”). Even if the customer company does not qualify as a financial institution, etc. under the Specific Financial Transaction Information Act, the financial authorities are cracking down on transactions related to virtual assets. In particular, the Specific Financial Transaction Information Act requires financial institutions, etc. to bear the obligation to confirm certain items regarding customers who are virtual asset business operators. Therefore, Law firm Veat conducted a legal review of whether the customer company qualifies as a financial institution, etc. under the Specific Financial Transaction Information Act and whether the customer is a virtual asset business operator, and advised the customer on the points to pay attention to in order to comply with the applicable laws and regulations. Comply with the Virtual Asset User Protection Act and Specific Financial Transaction Information Act, seek professional legal advice Whether a company engages in the business, and is subject to regulation under the Specific Financial Transaction Information Act and the Virtual Asset User Protection Act, may vary depending on whether the company is deemed to be an virtual asset business operator, with the presence or absence of repetition, continuity, business nature, purpose, scale, number of times, period, and disposition. Therefore, whether or not a person is a virtual asset business operator is difficult for a general person to determine on their own. Especially in the case of the Virtual Asset User Protection Act, since it is a law that went into effect on July 19, 2024, it is necessary to clearly understand the precedents and the position of the Financial Supervisory Service in order to comply with the law, and we recommend that you receive a legal review from a legal expert. Law firm Veat provides customized legal advice to various companies in the virtual asset, fintech, blockchain, and financial regulation fields. Therefore, if you have questions about compliance with the Virtual Asset User Protection Act or if a legal problem arises during the execution of virtual asset-related work, please feel free to contact Law firm Veat. This case study can also be viewed on the Law firm Veat blog below. - What is the impact on my business? Specific Financial Transaction Information Act and Virtual Asset User Protection Act Thank you. Law firm Veat