Case Studies
[Criminal] A case representing a defendant in a criminal complaint for violation of the Medical Technologist Act, leading to a decision of no indictment.
Law firm Veat successfully obtained a non-prosecution decision from the prosecutor’s office representing a defendant in a criminal complaint case for violation of the Medical Technologists Act. According to Article 14, Paragraph 2 of the Medical Technologists Act, it is prohibited to arrange or introduce customers to a specific optical shop or optometrist for profit, and a fine of up to 5 million won may be imposed for violating this provision. The defendant (client) in this case operated an online company and was facing a criminal complaint for violation of Article 14, Paragraph 2 of the Medical Technologists Act. Law firm Veat meticulously reviewed whether the defendant’s (client’s) sales activities constituted 'arrangement’ as referred to in the Medical Technologists Act, and submitted a legal opinion emphasizing that the client’s sales activities did not constitute an arrangement for a specific optical shop. Accordingly, the prosecutor’s office accepted Law firm Veat’s opinion and decided to issue a non-prosecution decision for the defendant (client). If you need the opinion of a legal expert regarding the Medical Technologists Act, please contact Law firm Veat. Thank you. Sincerely, Law firm Veat
[Consulting] Review of Real Estate Trust Income Rights and ABL Investment Structure for Office Hotels and Residence Hotels
Law firm Veat performed legal review and risk analysis regarding real estate priority profit rights investment at the request of investor Mr. A. Please refer to Law firm Veat's official blog (Review of real estate trust profits and ABL investment structure for office hotels and residences) for more details. Thank you. From Law firm Veat
[Consulting] Legal advisory service for content business cooperation contract with esports professional gaming team Law firm Veat
Law firm Veat received a request from esports agency A and reviewed a contract for content business cooperation with B Progame team, contributing to the successful conclusion of the contract. Please refer to Law firm Veat’s official blog (esports Progame team content business cooperation contract legal consultation ) for more details. Thank you. Law firm Veat
[Consulting] Agent for Foreign Securities Acquisition Notification
G Combination, which performs venture capital in Japan, recently intended to proceed with equity investment in a mid-sized company in Korea. Law firm Veat represented and proceeded with the foreign securities acquisition reporting work of the Japanese venture capital in the equity investment process, and successfully concluded it. Please check Law firm Veat’s official blog (Foreign Securities Acquisition Reporting Representation) article for more details. Thank you. Law firm Veat
[Consulting] PEF's GP Registration
Law firm Veat recently received a mandate from D, which operates an investment management business, and proceeded with the new registration procedure for the operation manager (hereinafter GP) of a private equity fund (hereinafter PEF) as stipulated in the “Act on Capital Markets and Financial Investment.” We received notification from the Financial Supervisory Service on December 21, 2018, that D was registered as an operation manager. After receiving a mandate from D, Law firm Veat provided legal advice based on Article 249-15 of the “Act on Capital Markets and Financial Investment,” regulations related to securities investment businesses, etc., to ensure that the GP registration process could be completed quickly and accurately. This case had a unique aspect, in that the company, which previously operated an investment management business, was seeking GP registration, which differed from the new registration of a typical full-time GP. In particular, we carefully reviewed issues related to internal controls, such as the conflict of interest prevention system, in preparation for potential issues. Furthermore, Law firm Veat quickly provided advisory opinions regarding capital market law issues for which D received a supplementary request from the Financial Supervisory Service, enabling the registration process to proceed smoothly. If you need legal advice regarding PEF GP registration, please feel free to contact us at any time. Thank you. Law firm Veat
[Litigation] A case where a favorable ruling was obtained from the Korea Commercial Arbitration Board in a dispute over BJ management.
Regarding the exclusive contract termination dispute involving popular broadcaster BJ A (hereinafter referred to as Broadcaster A), Law firm Veat represented K Entertainment (hereinafter referred to as Company K) who entered into an exclusive contract with Broadcaster A, and received a full victory judgment. 1. Overview of the Case Company K recognized Broadcaster A's potential for growth and proposed internet broadcasting BJ activities to her first. They promised to distribute the profits obtained through internet broadcasting with Company K, and Broadcaster A entered into an exclusive management contract with Company K. In particular, while exclusive contracts generally have a contract period of 7 years, Company K adjusted the period of the exclusive contract to a short period in accordance with A's request. However, Broadcaster A grew into a popular BJ and her profits increased by hundreds of millions, and she unilaterally requested termination of the exclusive contract, claiming that Company K had not properly fulfilled the management obligations stipulated in the exclusive contract, and failed to fulfill the promise of profit distribution. Accordingly, Company K referred the case to this law firm for dispute resolution in accordance with the terms of the exclusive contract. 2. Result of Judgment Broadcaster A claimed termination of the exclusive contract due to reasons such as insufficient equipment support and schedule coordination by Company K. Accordingly, Law firm Veat submitted evidence to prove that Company K had faithfully fulfilled the management obligations to Broadcaster A, emphasized the special nature of the management contract, and submitted an opinion to the Korea Commercial Arbitration Board. In addition, a claim for profit distribution was filed against Broadcaster A. As a result, the Korea Commercial Arbitration Board did not accept Broadcaster A's claim for termination and cancellation of the exclusive contract, and accepted Law firm Veat's claim for profit distribution. Law firm Veat led to a full approval judgment from the Korea Commercial Arbitration Board, stating that "Broadcaster A must pay profit to Company K." Based on its experience handling commercial arbitration cases related to entertainment exclusive contracts and profit distribution, Law firm Veat analyzed the facts and legal principles meticulously in this case as well, persuading the arbitration panel and successfully protecting the interests of Company K. Commercial arbitration cases have the advantage of being resolved quickly, but on the other hand, it is necessary to quickly identify the problems with the case and persuade the arbitration panel. It is a single-tier system with the same effect as a confirmed court judgment, so the case must be handled with caution. In particular, in arbitration, the decision of the arbitrator is given considerable discretion therefore generally a partial victory judgment is given with the claim amount being half. But this case can be seen as a case where Law firm Veat successfully protected the interests of Company K. Law firm Veat is working with experts in areas such as game business and management to look at the case from various angles and do its best to resolve legal disputes. If you have any questions, please contact us through the following methods. Thank you. Law firm Veat
[Financial News_Hot Legal Figures] “Regulatory Sandbox is a temporary measure..The National Assembly should revise the law”
[Financial News_The Talk of the Legal Community] “Regulatory Sandbox is a temporary measure..The National Assembly should revise the law” "Regulatory Sandbox application must be written strategically" Expected to play a role in resolving conflicts among stakeholders in the industry Currently in the hardware settlement stage..Software development needed For more details, please refer to the Financial News article ("Conflict between existing and innovative industries, regulatory sandbox will be a breakthrough") Thank you. Law firm Veat Dream
[Herald Economy] Do you know 'homma', the shadow of K-pop?
Please refer to the Herald Economy article (Do you know ‘homma’ of K-pop’s shadow?) for more details. Thank you. Law firm Veat
[The Bell] Lawyers Who Game… Aiming to Become a Legal Market Unicorn
This year, Veat's dream is remarkable as it enters the league table for the first time. As a newly established law firm, it aims to continuously expand its advisory capacity. It believes that it can strengthen its position in the legal market through co-growth with its clients. Omitted... Please check The Bell article (Lawyers Who Game... "We will become a legal market unicorn.") for more details. Thank you. Law firm Veat
[NSP통신] In-hyeop "실질적 규제개선 위한 제도 운영돼야” translates to [NSP통신] In-hyeop "A system should be operated for substantial regulatory improvement.”
The Korea Internet Enterprises Association (President Hansungsook, hereinafter referred to as KIEA) held the ‘2019 Good Internet Club 2nd Event’ at the KIEA En Space (located in Samsung-dong) on the 26th. Attorney Song Doyoung said, “We’re doing a lot of corporate consultations related to the regulatory sandbox, but the reality is that even with the minimum required documents, it’s difficult for small startups to write them.” He added, “Since it’s in the early stages of implementation, I hope it will be simplified by checking only the standardized parts as related data accumulates.” Omitted... Please check the article from NSP Communications (KIEA “A system for substantive regulatory improvement should be operated”) for more details. Thank you. Law firm Veat