Case Studies
[Law firm Veat TIP] Copyright Must-Read Legal Guide ‘Right of Attribution, Actual Case Analysis’
Law firm Veat TIP(Technology Intellectual Property) Team analyzed key precedents related to the right of integrity and contributed to the startup-focused media platform Platum. In an era where the importance of copyright protection is emphasized in various content industries such as music, video, and publishing, the right of integrity is a core concept that establishes legal standards while respecting the original author's intention and allowing for new creation. In this column, we have detailed the application criteria focusing on the specifics and major precedents of the right of integrity. You can check this column through [the link]. This column, published by the Law firm Veat TIP team, provides useful information for creators who are curious about the criteria that courts use to judge between the author’s rights and freedom of creation, and for creators who intend to produce secondary works utilizing existing copyrighted works. Legal issues surrounding the right of integrity are complex, with interpretations differing across precedents. While modifications that preserve the essence of the original work may be deemed infringement, they can also be considered new creations if they are modified to the point that all traces of the original are eliminated. Creators must accurately identify what legal protection their work can receive through expert advice, amid legal uncertainty, and thereby prevent unnecessary legal disputes and ensure legitimate creative activities. The Law firm Veat TIP team reviews various cases to which copyright law applies and provides legal advice to protect the rights of creators, including the right of integrity. By analyzing major precedents and legal regulations, we offer practical solutions and support a balance between the legitimate use of copyrighted works and the protection of rights. If you require copyright legal advice related to the right of integrity, please consider receiving professional advice from the Law firm Veat TIP team. Thank you. Law firm Veat
[IT Lawsuits] Check! From the meaning of Crawling to Legal Risks. Possibility of Violations of Copyright Law and Unfair Competition Prevention Law.
▶What is Crawling? Crawling is a technology for automatically collecting information existing on websites, and is also used by search engines when indexing websites. However, recently, there has been an increase in cases where companies crawl and utilize data from competitors or specific platforms, which has also led to an increase in legal disputes. In particular, unauthorized crawling may be interpreted as a violation of the 「Copyright Act」 and 「Act on Prevention of Unfair Competition and Protection of Business Secrets」 (hereinafter referred to as the “Unfair Competition Prevention Act”), which may result in criminal punishment or liability for damages. Therefore, it is essential to receive legal review regarding the possibility of violation of the Copyright Act or the Unfair Competition Prevention Act before utilizing information from another website by crawling it. ▶Possibility of Violation of the Copyright Act The Copyright Act prohibits unauthorized copying, distribution, and modification of copyrighted works, and databases can also be subject to protection. The Supreme Court has stated that in order to determine that the right of the database creator has been infringed, it must be the case that the data has been copied or substantially reproduced without the permission of the database creator. When determining whether the copying constitutes a substantial portion, both quantitative and qualitative aspects must be considered. The quantitative aspect is determined by comparing the copied portion to the size of the entire database, while the qualitative aspect is determined by considering whether the database creator has invested substantial human or material resources in the production of the individual materials contained in the copied portion, or in the updating, verification, or supplementation of those materials. (Supreme Court Decision 2022. 5. 12. in Case No. 2021do1533). That is, if a specific website provides data with a significant scale and substantial human and material investment has been made in that data, utilizing it through crawling may be recognized as a violation of the Copyright Act. ▶Possibility of Violation of the Unfair Competition Prevention Act Paragraph 1, Sub-paragraph (d), Article 2 of the Unfair Competition Prevention Act deems the act of using achievements created through substantial investment or effort without authorization as an act of unfair competition. The High Court of Seoul has stated that in order to determine that something constitutes achievements created through substantial investment or effort, it must be evaluated as not belonging to the so-called public domain where anyone can freely utilize it (High Court of Seoul Decision 2022. 8. 25. in Case No. 2021na2034740). That is, if the data provided by a specific website is evaluated as having been created through substantial investment or effort to the extent that it does not belong to the public domain, the act of utilizing that data through crawling may violate the Unfair Competition Prevention Act. ▶Legal Criteria for Judging Crawling The court comprehensively considers the following elements when determining whether crawling is illegal. 1. Violation of Terms of Use - Many websites prohibit crawling through their terms of use, and violation of these terms may result in legal issues. 2. Whether Information is Publicly Available - The legality varies depending on whether the information is accessible without logging in, or whether it is provided only to specific users. 3. Whether it Infringes on a Competitor’s Business Interests - There is a high probability of legal dispute if the crawled information is a competitor’s core asset, and unauthorized utilization thereof causes economic loss to the other party. ▶Mandatory Legal Review Before Utilizing Crawling Law firm Veat specializes in legal consultation for IT, data, and information technology, and has extensive experience in various legal issues related to crawling. In particular, Veat collaborates with various startups, IT companies, and data-driven platforms to support the legal utilization of data through crawling. If you need legal consultation regarding IT and software-related matters, please feel free to contact Law firm Veat. ▶Legal Consultation Related to Crawling by Law firm Veat - Crawling Legality Review: Prior review to determine whether a specific crawling method violates the Copyright Act, Unfair Competition Prevention Act, and Terms of Use - Data Utilization Consulting: Providing legal consultation on how to legally process and utilize crawled data - Crawling Dispute Response and Litigation Support: Establishing a legal response strategy for the company and litigating in the event of a crawling-related legal dispute.
[IT Litigation] In the Age of Artificial Intelligence (AI), Data Protection Laws for Companies to Know
The advancement of artificial intelligence (AI) technology has brought innovation across industries, but it has also increased the risk of personal information infringement. In August 2023, the Personal Information Protection Committee announced the ‘Policy Direction for Safe Use of Personal Information in the Age of Artificial Intelligence,’ emphasizing the importance of personal information protection in the process of artificial intelligence (AI) processing vast amounts of data. Data used by artificial intelligence (AI) models often contains sensitive personal information, which increases the possibility of personal information abuse. For example, artificial intelligence (AI) can be used to impersonate individuals or for phishing, and deepfake technology has emerged as a social problem. To solve these problems, providers of artificial intelligence (AI) services must comply with the Personal Information Protection Act. If artificial intelligence (AI) collects and uses data without the consent of the data subject in the process of learning personal information, a violation of the law may occur, so companies must strictly comply with relevant regulations to avoid legal liability. Artificial intelligence(AI) and Personal Information Protection Act
[Startup CEOs Must-Read] Procedures for Registered Directors After Term Expiration
Law firm Veat received a request from startup Company A (hereinafter referred to as "the client") to support the process of re-election and retirement registration due to the expiration of the term of office of a director. The client contacted Law firm Veat, a startup registration law firm, to confirm the legally required procedures as the director’s term expired. Upon receiving the client's request, Law firm Veat first reviewed what procedures were necessary after the director’s term expired. According to the Commercial Code, the term of office of a director is a maximum of 3 years, and the term can be determined in accordance with the articles of incorporation within the range of a maximum of 3 years. Also, if the term expires before the regular general meeting of shareholders for the business year, the term can be extended until the said regular general meeting. The term of office of an auditor lasts until the end of the final regular general meeting of shareholders after taking office within 3 years. Registration Process According to the Circumstances After Director’s Expiration After the director’s term expires, if the director no longer remains with the company, a retirement registration must be processed. Law firm Veat, after the client confirmed the director's retirement, reviewed the articles of incorporation and provided the necessary documents. Based on this, we supported the swift reflection of the fact of retirement in the registration. If the existing director decides to continue with the company, a re-election registration must be processed. Re-election is the process of re-appointing the director simultaneously with the expiration of the director’s term, and this process must be carried out within the legally stipulated timeframe. Especially, if the re-election or retirement registration is not done within seek the help of a registration expert and proceed swiftly. Law firm Veat confirmed the director’s expiration term, confirmed the expiration of the term in accordance with the articles of incorporation at the time of retirement, and provided detailed guidance on whether the number of directors stipulated in the articles of incorporation was not lacking and what the necessary documents were.
[Law firm specializing in startup investment] K-Beauty startup Best Innovation, provided legal advice related to securing 23 billion won in investment.
Best Innovation, which holds the premium aesthetic brand ‘KOPHER’ rapidly growing in the recent K-beauty market, has successfully completed a 23 billion won seed investment. Law firm Veat exclusively provided legal advice to Best Innovation in this investment process, ensuring the smooth execution of the investment contract, from responding to investor due diligence and reviewing legal issues to drafting and reviewing term sheets, providing legal advice during the term sheet adjustment process, and drafting and reviewing investment contracts and shareholder agreements. In particular, advice was provided to ensure that the interests and autonomy of the company receiving investment and the existing major shareholders were not excessively infringed, and to provide advice for determining balanced investment conditions that would allow for the company's long-term growth through investment. Best Innovation, founded in 2019, is a health & beauty (H&B) company holding skincare brand ‘KOPHER’ and health functional food brand ‘ANDO’, and is rapidly growing domestically and internationally. In particular, KOPHER has established itself in the premium aesthetic market, showing explosive growth with an 84% increase in sales in the first half of 2024 compared to the previous year, and has gained great trust from consumers with a high rating of 4.8 points (out of 5) on the brand’s official smart store. Through this investment, Best Innovation plans to promote strategies such as expanding into overseas markets, including Japan, the United States, the Middle East, and Indonesia, launching beauty devices, launching a global video content beauty platform, and renewing the brand design targeting the 2030 generation. Best Innovation’s global video content beauty platform will adopt a structure that combines content and commerce to induce inflow into a brand mall using YouTube marketing strategies. This will enhance brand awareness and competitiveness in the global market. Law firm Veat ranked among the top 10 in Korea by deal count, advising on 39 M&A deals worth approximately $119 million, as listed in Bloomberg’s M&A league table for the third quarter of this year. Based on this rich experience and successful track record, we provide professional advice to ensure legal stability in the startup investment process and to conclude balanced investment contracts. As an investment case for so-called ‘K-beauty’ startups, which are recently showing rapid growth, we wish Korean beauty & aesthetic startups venturing into the global market success, and we will provide legal advice to assist in investment attraction and contract conclusion for various startups, including K-beauty, so that growing startups can establish themselves as successful global companies, from responding to legal due diligence to reviewing investment contracts and shareholder agreements. For more detailed information on Best Innovation’s investment news, please refer to the article below, and if you need legal advice related to startup investment attraction, please feel free to contact Law firm Veat. 'No. 1 in Japanese Commerce' K-beauty Best Innovation Secures 23 Billion Won Seed Investment - Money Today Thank you. Law firm Veat
[Law firm Veat TIP] Must-read legal guide ‘Right of Attribution’ before using copyrighted works
The Law firm Veat TIP (Technology Intellectual Property) team, with a deep understanding of copyright law and abundant case experience, has contributed a detailed explanation of the integrity maintenance right to be careful when using copyrighted works to Platum, a specialized media platform for startups.
[Professional Review of Repayment Agreement] A Case Where a Corporate Lawyer Protected the Client's Rights
Law firm Veat thoroughly reviewed the settlement agreement between the client company (hereinafter referred to as "the client") and its trade partner at the request of a label company A. The client wanted to create a settlement agreement with a trade partner who was not paying installment payments and wanted to reach a smooth agreement, and requested legal advice from Law firm Veat to conclude it legally safely. Law firm Veat Contract Attorney's Key Review of the Settlement Agreement 1. Addition of Delayed Payment Damages Clause The client wanted to prevent damages that could occur if the trade partner did not pay the amount due by the due date. Accordingly, Law firm Veat clearly stipulated the payment deadline and added a clause stipulating that if payment is made after the deadline, an additional delayed payment damages ratio would be borne. This strengthened the debtor's willingness to pay and minimized the client’s financial losses in the event of default. 2. Specific Payment Plan and Method Specified It is important to not only specify the payment schedule but also to specify the payment method in the settlement agreement. Accordingly, Law firm Veat established a realistic payment plan so that the trade partner could make payment, and reflected it in the contract. Various options such as lump-sum payment and installment payment were considered as the payment method, and the details were clearly described. 3. Clarification of Legal Basis of Claim The settlement agreement should clearly state the contract on which the client's claim against the trade partner is based. Law firm Veat thoroughly reviewed the client’s existing contract to clearly state the basis for the claim in the settlement agreement. This secured the legitimacy of the claim legally and can be used as reliable evidence in the event of future legal disputes. 4. Addition of Payment Obligation Compliance Clause If the debtor does not faithfully fulfill the contents of the settlement agreement, additional legal action by the creditor may be necessary. Accordingly, Law firm Veat clearly stipulated that the trade partner must faithfully perform the payment obligation and that additional legal liability will be borne if violated. This strengthened the legal binding force of the settlement agreement and clarified the debtor’s responsibility. Why is a Review of the Settlement Agreement Necessary? The settlement agreement is an important contract that clearly stipulates the payment conditions between the debtor and creditor and prevents potential disputes. Especially when unpaid debts exist, failing to resolve them smoothly can lead to long-term delay in debt collection. Therefore, we recommend reviewing the settlement agreement with the help of a legal professional to protect your legal rights and minimize risks that may occur during the payment process. Unpaid debt issues can be a significant burden on business operations, and it is essential to establish legal countermeasures in advance to resolve them effectively. Law firm Veat has extensive legal advisory experience ranging from initial startups to various stages of corporate growth. In particular, it handles sensitive issues such as employee departures, which companies in the IT/startup sector, where technology and business intersect, face, shareholder contracts, investment, and provides rapid and professional legal advice like an in-house counsel. Furthermore, it provides legal advice optimized for clients by comprehensively reviewing legal issues that may occur in actual business environments. If you need regular corporate legal advisory services necessary during the growth process of a company, such as agreement and contract review, please contact Law firm Veat. You can check the case example of this case on the Law firm Veat blog below. - [Professional Review of Settlement Agreement] Case of Client Protection by Corporate Attorney Thank you. Law firm Veat
[Checklist for Medical Device Industry] Notice of Amendments to the Personal Information Protection Act and Medical Device Act
Law firm Veat provided guidance to companies (hereinafter "clients") engaged in the leasing of industrial machinery and equipment, including medical devices, regarding recent amendments to the "Personal Information Protection Act" and the amended "Medical Devices Act" (amended on August 8, 2023, and scheduled to be implemented on February 9, 2025), and matters that clients should particularly note in relation to these changes. 1. Key Considerations Following Amendments to the "Personal Information Protection Act" The "Personal Information Protection Act," amended on March 14, 2023, has been in effect since September 6, 2023. The main contents of these amendments to the "Personal Information Protection Act" are as follows: ① Strengthened Obligations for Personal Information Protection and Management The Act stipulates that data subjects can request their personal information processors to transfer their personal information to the data subject or their representative. This strengthens the data subject’s control over their personal information. This emphasizes that the management and utilization rights of personal data belong to the individual data subject, which is a new paradigm known as "mydata." Mydata is expected to be particularly utilized in the field of individual health information access, storage, transmission, and utilization. Therefore, even when performing duties related to medical devices that process individual health data, it is necessary to be aware of the relevant amended provisions. ② Guaranteed Control over Decisions Made Through AI (Artificial Intelligence) and Automated Systems The Act has been amended to allow data subjects to reject automated decisions made through AI and similar technologies that significantly affect their rights or obligations, or to request explanations regarding these decisions. As automated systems utilizing AI are increasingly applied across all aspects of corporate operations, this amendment aims to protect the rights of data subjects. Considering the current situation where AI technology is widely incorporated into medical devices, it is necessary to carefully examine the amendments to the "Personal Information Protection Act." ③ Regulation Harmonization Between Online and Offline Businesses Previously, the "Personal Information Protection Act" applied separate special provisions to online service providers. This resulted in different regulatory application methods for online and offline businesses, even for the same actions. This amendment eliminates the differences in regulation between online and offline businesses and establishes that the same regulations can be applied. ④ Relaxed Regulations on Overseas Transfer of Personal Information and Compliance with International Standards Previously, strict restrictions were placed on the overseas transfer of personal information. However, the scope of permissible overseas transfers has been expanded to align with international standards (Global Standard). 2. Key Considerations Following Amendments to the "Medical Devices Act" The "Medical Devices Act" [Effective February 9, 2025] [Law No. 19608, amended on August 8, 2023] Section 13-2(Submission of Expenditure Report on Details of Economic Benefits, etc. Provided) ② When a manufacturer, etc. entrusts a medical device sales promoter with sales or lease promotion activities for medical devices, they must prepare a contract according to the provisions of the Enforcement Decree and retain a copy of the contract and related supporting documents for 5 years each. Section 18(Compliance Requirements of Sellers, etc.) ④ The provisions of Section 13-2 shall apply mutatis mutandis to sellers and lessors in accordance with Section 2. In this case, "manufacturer" means "seller or lessor," and "medical device sales promoter entrusted by a manufacturer with sales promotion activities for medical devices" means "medical device sales promoter entrusted by a seller or lessor with sales or lease promotion activities for medical devices." Furthermore, according to the amended "Medical Devices Act," manufacturers, sellers, and lessors must prepare a contract when entrusting sales or lease promotion activities to medical device sales promoters and must retain a copy of the contract and related supporting documents for 5 years each. In this case, Law firm Veat reviewed whether the client belongs to any of the business types mentioned in the amended "Medical Devices Act" scheduled to take effect and provided guidance on the obligations the client must fulfill accordingly. Partner with Law firm Veat, specializing in IT, healthcare, and medical devices Law firm Veat is a law firm with specialized legal experts focused on IT, healthcare, and medical device sectors, possessing a deep understanding of the industry’s characteristics and regulatory environment. Therefore, Law firm Veat provides customized legal advice to help companies in these rapidly evolving technology and medical device industries effectively comply with amended legislation and minimize legal risks. If you experience legal issues in the operation of your business, such as the "Personal Information Protection Act" and the "Medical Devices Act," please contact Law firm Veat. Law firm Veat will provide you with tailored legal advice optimized for your specific circumstances. An example of this case can also be found on the Law firm Veat blog: - [Checklist for Medical Device Industries] Guidance on Amendments to the Personal Information Protection Act and the Medical Devices Act Thank you. Law firm Veat
"The necessity of personal information protection measures as seen in administrative sanctions cases arising from violations of the 「Personal Information Protection Act」"
Recently, administrative penalties due to violations of the “Personal Information Protection Act” are increasing. Law firm Veat is informing you about the necessity of personal information protection measures, focusing on cases that have received fines and penalties due to violations of the “Personal Information Protection Act.” Most of the sanctions were due to a lack of protection measures for personal information and occurred in cases where personal information was leaked, with a lack of firewall installation, security patch application, and personal information encryption, as well as the absence of security measures, being pointed out as major causes. These violations can lead to corrective orders, fines, and public disclosure. Companies and institutions need to strictly comply with the Personal Information Protection Act to prevent such cases and minimize potential risks. Administrative Penalty Cases Due to Violations of the Personal Information Protection Act 1. Fine for C Company, an E-Commerce and Delivery Platform159,945,000 KRW, Penalty 10,800,000 KRW C Company, an e-commerce and delivery platform, regarding the transmission of delivery personnel's real names and phone numbers to restaurants, was imposed a fine of 278.65 million KRW for personal information leakage and violation of safety obligation, and a penalty of 10.8 million KRW for delaying the notification within 24 hours after recognizing the personal information leakage. Additionally, a fine of 13.1 billion KRW was imposed for the leakage of personal information of orderer and recipient to another seller within the seller system. 2. W Company, Providing Financial & Real Estate Related ServicesFine 51.10 million KRW, Penalty 2.70 million KRW W Company, which provides online video services related to financial and real estate, was imposed a fine of 51.10 million KRW and a penalty of 2.70 million KRW due to hacking and leakage of personal information, due to lack of firewall installation, lack of IP address restrictions, lack of password protection measures when accessing the database, and lack of authentication procedures for the database administrator account. 3. B Company, a Used Car Trading and Brokerage Platform Fine 51.10 million KRW, Penalty 2.70 million KRW B Company, a used car trading and brokerage platform, was imposed a fine of 959 million KRW and a penalty of 810 million KRW for the leakage of personal information of 4,004 members due to SQL injection attack caused by lack of firewall installation, failure to comply with the obligation to delete personal information, lack of personal information encryption, and delay in notification of leakage. 4. UniversityFine 42.80 million KRW S University was imposed a fine of 19.30 million KRW and a penalty of 6.60 million KRW due to hacking and leakage of personal information of approximately 500 people due to lack of security patch application and lack of firewall and intrusion prevention system, and failure to encrypt resident registration numbers. K University was imposed a fine of 42.80 million KRW due to the leakage of personal information of approximately 2,000 students due to insufficient security patches. Through the administrative penalty cases of companies, it is once again confirmed that platform companies need to pre-determine the scope of personal information processing measures, the necessary information disclosure, and the scope of access rights for personal information processors or entrustment companies, and build personal information processing systems. Also, it is confirmed that even educational institutions such as schools cannot escape the obligation of personal information protection, and that even startups or small businesses cannot escape the threat of large fines. For companies and institutions, entities processing personal information for business purposes (“personal information processors”) require comprehensive technical and administrative measures as stipulated by the Personal Information Protection Act, and failure to comply with these measures can lead to significant legal risks, such as fines, penalties, and reputational damage. "Personal information processors" should systematically review legal compliance requirements with the help of legal experts, strengthen internal policies and systems to create a safe data management environment to prevent personal information leakage and risks of fines. Law firm Veat’s Personal Information Protection Team, composed of personal information protection advisors from the Personal Information Protection Committee, provides personal information protection advisory services to ensure that personal information processors comply with personal information-related laws, as well as consulting services for establishing and establishing personal information protection systems, to support clients in minimizing the risk of personal information leakage. Furthermore, it provides comprehensive advice on issues related to personal information laws, from drafting essential forms such as personal information consent forms, personal information processing policies, and internal management plans, to responding to on-site inspections by the supervising authority, to managing crisis and investigation in the event of infringement and leakage, and to submitting opinions on administrative penalties. If you have any legal inquiries regarding personal information protection, please feel free to contact Law firm Veat. This content can also be found on Law firm Veat's blog below. - Cases of Administrative Penalties Due to Violations of the Personal Information Protection Act to Understand the Necessity of Personal Information Protection Measures Thank you. Law firm Veat
Essential Legal Checkup for Executives, Review Cases of Business Embezzlement Crime
Law firm Veat received a request from an entertainment company (hereinafter "client") to review the risk of breach of duty by the company's executive. Breach of duty (Article 356 of the Criminal Law) occurs when an agent handling another’s affairs commits an act contrary to their duties, causing damage to the principal (company) and simultaneously obtaining property gains for themselves or a third party. If an executive of a company improperly disposes of company assets or prioritizes the interests of a third party over the company’s interests, the act may be judged as breach of duty. Here, the act ‘contrary to duties’ includes all acts that violate the principal’s trust relationship by failing to perform actions expected by law, contract, or principles of good faith, or by performing actions that should not be performed, based on a review of the specific situation, nature, and characteristics of the agency. It can be determined whether the act violates the executive's performance of duties, whether actual damage occurred to the company, and whether the executive intentionally committed the act while aware of the damage. Simple business mistakes or failures do not constitute breach of duty, and whether there was an intent to harm the company’s interests is an important criterion for judgment. Business inherently contains risk, so even if a business manager makes a decision based on available information with the intent to benefit the company without personal gain and makes careful judgments, there may be cases where the prediction is wrong, resulting in damage to the company. Therefore, in such cases, the standard for interpreting intent must be relaxed so that criminal liability for breach of duty cannot be imposed, and whether to recognize the intent for breach of duty based on business judgment depends on the circumstances leading to the questioned business judgment, the motivation, the nature of the business subject to the judgment, the economic situation of the company, the likelihood of loss and the likelihood of gain, and whether it is recognized as an intentional act of acquiring property gains for themselves or a third party and causing damage to the principal. (Supreme Court Decision 2007. 3. 15. in Case No. 2004do5742) The Supreme Court has ruled that a distinction must be made between breach of duty and business judgment. That is, even if a business manager makes a careful judgment without the intent to obtain personal gain, and as a result, damage occurs to the company, the standard for interpreting intent must be relaxed so that it cannot be punished as breach of duty. However, if a specific decision was deliberately made knowing that it would cause damage to the company and a third party obtained economic benefits, the possibility of breach of duty increases. Based on this interpretation by the Supreme Court, Law firm Veat examined whether the contract that the client’s executive was about to enter into was consistent with the company’s interests, whether it was a simple business judgment, or whether a third party was obtaining economic benefits, whether there was any intentionality of the executive, and other risks of breach of duty, analyzed the client’s contract documents in detail, and presented measures to reduce the possibility of breach of duty. A stable growth partner for businesses, Law firm Veat Breach of duty is a legal issue that frequently arises in the process of corporate executives making business decisions. Even if the corporate management's decision has an adverse effect on the company, it does not always lead to breach of duty. The important thing is whether the decision is based on a reasonable business judgment and whether there was an intention to deliberately cause harm to the company. Law firm Veat, specializing in corporate law and criminal law, is an established corporate law firm with expertise in complex legal issues will continue to fulfill its role as a solid partner in building the company's legal safety net. To promote the company's stable growth and prevent legal risks in advance, please consider receiving specialized legal advice from Law firm Veat. The following is an example of the case’s business practice that can be verified on Law firm Veat’s blog. - Essential legal review for management, review case of breach of duty Thank you. Law firm Veat