Case Studies
Law firm Veat, achieved 9th place in the Bloomberg M&A league table for the first quarter of 2025 based on the total number of deals.
Law firm Veat (VEAT Law Firm) ranked 9th in Bloomberg’s global M&A league table for the first quarter of 2025, based on the total number of deals. Bloomberg’s M&A league table is a respected global evaluation indicator that financial institutions and companies worldwide refer to in order to understand performance and trends in the mergers and acquisitions (M&A) field. This league table comprehensively evaluates the size and number of deals, as well as strategic importance, and is announced quarterly, gaining trust and reputation globally. The achievement recorded by Law firm Veat in this first quarter of 2025 league table is a significant result achieved in competition with domestic law firms, and is evaluated as demonstrating both quantitative growth in deals and qualitative growth in various fields at the same time. Law firm Veat has particularly advised on several investment and M&A deals in major industries such as IT, bio, fintech, manufacturing, and K-beauty, earning high trust and satisfaction from clients. Despite complex and diverse deal structures, Law firm Veat accurately grasped the client’s requirements and the specifics of the deal, providing customized strategies and providing efficient and professional legal support to facilitate deal closure. Based on legal knowledge and industry understanding, Law firm Veat has deeply understood the client’s business strategy and proactively managed legal risk factors, practically supporting the client’s competitiveness enhancement and business value creation. Through this, Law firm Veat is consistently growing, recognized for its expertise not only in Korea but also in the international legal market. Also, Veat has opened an overseas investment reporting center to support foreign currency transaction reporting and overseas investment reporting required for attracting overseas investment or investing abroad, providing one-stop services and strengthening customer convenience from the customer's perspective. Furthermore, this achievement was driven by the core factor of synergy created through close collaboration and communication among lawyers with expertise in various fields. Law firm Veat will continue to provide more creative and professional legal services based on trust with clients, and will do its best to maximize client value. Thank you. Sincerely, Law firm Veat
Personal information protection is not an ‘expense’ but an ‘investment’.
According to the 「Personal Information Protection and Utilization Survey Results」 announced by the Personal Information Protection Commission in 2024, 39.5% of public institutions and 7.4% of private companies reported difficulties in personal information protection. However, these figures alone do not fully explain the difficulties that companies actually face. The majority of survey respondents were small organizations possessing ‘less than 1,000 personal information’ and an even 42.6% of private companies with 300 or more employees reported difficulties. Notably, the actual status of personal information safety assurance measures for these large-scale companies was only 9.2%, indicating that overall response capabilities are weak. As the statistics show, many companies are experiencing difficulties in personal information protection, and the number of cases of fines is also increasing. For example, recently, a domestic A easy payment service company was found to have illegally transmitted approximately 500 billion pieces of personal information to its overseas affiliate. This information included telephone numbers, email addresses, as well as sensitive consumption pattern information, and even though the proportion of actual payment service users was small, all user information was transferred abroad. A more serious problem was that the consent procedure for users was omitted in this process. This violated the 「Personal Information Protection Act」, which stipulates that consent from the individual must be obtained when providing third parties or transferring information overseas, and the company received substantial legal sanctions, including fines exceeding 1.5 billion KRW. Therefore, personal information protection goes beyond simple technical measures and requires the entire organization's legal response capabilities and a continuous management system. One-off checks or external outsourcing have limitations, and it is crucial to enhance the understanding of internal members and establish systematic prevention & response systems. Risk comes not from accidents, but from lack of preparation Article 64-2 (2) (9) of the 「Personal Information Protection Act」 stipulates that a personal information processor may be fined if it fails to take appropriate safety measures, resulting in the loss, theft, or leakage of personal information. In other words, the availability of prior measures, rather than the occurrence of an accident, is the criterion for determining legal responsibility. A lack of understanding of relevant laws was cited as the most common reason (77.2% for public institutions, 69.3% for private companies), along with other reasons such as ‘complexity of procedures’ and ‘lack of dedicated personnel.’ Public institutions were relatively more likely to complain about ‘lack of professional expertise in personnel,’ while private companies had difficulty ‘operating education programs.’ This is increasing the demand for specialized consultants who can provide guidance on how to apply laws and regulations in practice. However, many companies still center their response systems around post-incident actions. They report breaches late or provide inadequate notification to the information subject, which can increase the severity of the sanctions. Therefore, it is important to identify legal risks in advance, establish preventative measures, and simultaneously prepare practical-centered education and management manuals tailored to the workflow to ensure that they are put into practice within the organization. The Expertise and Practical Experience of Law firm Veat Law firm Veat provides specialized personal information protection legal advice and education programs to ensure that companies accurately understand and practice their obligations under the Personal Information Protection Act. In particular, based on practical experience accumulated in various environments, including the Personal Information Protection Commission, public institutions, and private companies, we provide comprehensive legal support from preventative measures to incident response. Partner Attorney Jo Eun-byeol is active in various public advisory bodies such as the Information Disclosure Deliberation Committee, Active Administration Committee, and Personal Information Dispute Mediation Committee, and can provide in-depth advice on personal information-related legal interpretation, policy consultation, and regulatory response. Partner Attorney Baek Seung-cheol is a former legal advisor to the Personal Information Protection Commission, as well as a member of various personal information-related deliberation and advisory committees. He is a certified IT lawyer by the Korea Bar Association and provides optimized legal advice by comprehensively considering IT and personal information protection issues. He also actively conducts practical training for public institutions and educational institutions based on his qualifications as a PIPL certification examiner and ISMS-P personal information protection management system certification examiner. Law firm Veat aims to establish effective response systems tailored to companies' realities and work environments, going beyond simple advice. If you need advice on preliminary checks and preventative systems, please feel free to contact [Law firm Veat Personal Information Center]. Thank you. Law firm Veat
[Law firm Veat TIP] The crossroads of the content industry, how to handle digital voice transmission?
Law firm Veat TIP(Technology Intellectual Property) team published a column on ‘compensation system and regulatory design related to ‘digital voice transmission’ on Platum, a startup-focused media platform. As music streaming, podcasts, webcasting, and other digital content services rapidly evolve, the legal obligations of business operators and the revenue structure of rightsholders differ fundamentally depending on whether these services constitute ‘transmission’ under copyright law or ‘digital voice transmission’. This column examines how such legal distinctions affect content platform businesses and emphasizes the need to design a compensation system that allows rightsholders and business operators to coexist and contribute to the sustainability of the entire industry, rather than simply restricting digital voice transmission functions. It contains important implications that startups and content platform planners can apply to actual service design. For detailed information, click [this link] to view the full column. This column provides useful information to planners, developers, and platform operators involved in the structural design of digital content businesses, Law firm Veat TIP team, specializing in intellectual property (IP), provides professional legal advice based on accumulated experience in the digital content field, including legal classification review based on service type, negotiation with copyright holders and trust entities, and establishment of dispute response strategies. If you need help with digital voice transmission, similar transmission, or other digital content services, please contact Law firm Veat at any time. Thank you. Law firm Veat
[IT Litigation] Software service contracts, the key conditions to prevent disputes are scope of work!
As the acceleration of the digital transformation era continues, demand for software development is rapidly increasing across various industries. Companies often enter into ‘software service contracts’ with external professional development firms to build systems or develop services. However, software development projects should inherently be carried out based on clear design and requirements, but in reality, frequent changes and additional requests arise even after the contract is signed. Software service contracts are typically structured as ‘fixed-price contracts’ where a certain deliverable is completed and compensation is paid accordingly. In other words, developers only receive payment upon completion of the specified software, making it crucial to clearly define the ‘scope of work’ in the contract to determine software completion. In actual software development projects, the scope of work is often vaguely stated in the contract. For example, it may be described with abstract terms like "system enhancement" or "including functional improvement," or the client may promise to provide specific requirements in a separate document (e.g., RFP) later. When the scope of work is unclear like this, disputes arise over whether additional requests or work orders that arise during the contract’s progress were included in the original contract.
Foreign investment reporting and foreign investment enterprise registration, essential requirements for practitioners.
Law firm Veat received a request from an open market (hereinafter referred to as "client") to proceed with foreign investment reporting and registration of a foreign investment enterprise. Company A, a domestic open market platform rapidly growing targeting the global market, decided to attract investment from a foreign investor and entrusted Law firm Veat, specializing in foreign exchange transaction reporting, with legal advice regarding foreign investment reporting and registration of a foreign investment enterprise. In this process, Law firm Veat comprehensively reviewed whether the investment qualifies as foreign investment under laws such as the "Foreign Investment Promotion Act" (hereinafter referred to as "Foreign Investment Act"), the Foreign Exchange Transaction Act, and other related laws, and performed a swift reporting and registration procedure. Furthermore, Law firm Veat meticulously analyzed the investor's nationality, domestic residence, residency status, source of funds, investment method, and applicable laws before carefully judging the necessity of foreign investment reporting. Based on the results, the firm prepared various documents for foreign investment reporting and registration of a foreign investment enterprise, and accurately and promptly proceeded with the entire process, including practical correspondence with related agencies. Additionally, Law firm Veat provided advice on risks and reporting obligations related to subsequent foreign exchange transactions, supporting the client in checking for regulatory burdens that could be encountered in the process of attracting foreign investment. Points to note when judging foreign national investment as a reporting target
Startup imitators (copycats), response to the Act on Prevention of Unfair Competition
Law firm Veat recently accepted a request from Startup A (hereinafter "the client") targeting the domestic and global markets to provide legal advice to proactively respond to competing businesses that almost completely copied the client's UI/UX, terms of use, privacy policy, etc. In the rapidly evolving digital market, a startup's creativity and agile execution are key assets for leading the market. However, these assets are also at risk of being exactly 'copied' by competitors or third parties. In fact, the problem of 'copycats' who have copied the overall business model, including UI/UX, terms of use, privacy policy, and service planning, is becoming a realistic threat that many startups face in domestic and international markets. Law firm Veat sent a demand letter to the competing business that imitated the client's actions, demanding an immediate cessation of the illegal acts and threatening strong legal action if they recurred. By taking such proactive measures, the firm provided the client with a practical solution to protect their rights from imitation damage and focus on their business. Recently, cases of businesses almost identically imitating a startup's planning, design, and policy documents have been increasing. In particular, startups preparing for global expansion are more likely to experience 'imitation' issues at a sensitive point in time to secure market share, which can have a serious impact on their business, going beyond just annoyance. What is 'imitation' under the Act on the Prevention of Unfair Competition? Under the Act on the Prevention of Unfair Competition and Protection of Trade Secrets (hereinafter "the Act on the Prevention of Unfair Competition"), 'imitation' goes beyond simple similarity of trademarks or designs, and refers to the act of unfairly using another's creative achievements or business information. In particular, according to the recently revised legislation, the configuration of UI/UX, platform structure, terms of use, and privacy policies, such as policy documents, are also included in the scope of protection, and if these are intentionally implemented in a similar manner, they can be deemed as 'an act of unfairly utilizing another's achievements.' That is, if a competitor unlawfully imitates elements reflecting a startup's creativity and strategy, it may be subject to legal sanctions as an act of unfair competition. Proactive response to 'imitation' businesses starting with a 'demand letter' Law firm Veat strongly demanded that the imitation business cease its illegal activities through a 'demand letter.' A demand letter does not have legal binding force, but it is an important strategic starting point for raising an official issue and can be used as important evidence in the event of a subsequent legal dispute. This proactive measure is effective in clearly informing the imitation business of their actions and inducing them to take voluntary corrective action. In addition, to increase the effectiveness of these measures, Law firm Veat also provided the client with the following strategic advice. Law firm Veat's subsequent strategic response Responding to imitation businesses requires more than just protest or warning; it must be based on sophisticated strategies and legal grounds. To effectively respond to such cases, it is important to organize objective evidence to prove the circumstances of imitation and secure evidence. Initial strategic preparation is necessary, including documenting screen captures, utilizing web archives, comparing documents, and organizing internal development records, and a response strategy based on legal standards is required, rather than emotional responses. If the imitation business does not take corrective action after a demand letter has been sent, or only superficially corrects it and continues the actual imitation, more powerful and specific legal remedies should be considered. At this stage, a strategic approach that combines civil and criminal proceedings may be effective. First, the civil claim under Article 4 of the Act on the Prevention of Unfair Competition includes ▲ cessation and prohibition of unfair competition, ▲ claim for damages, ▲ claim for the destruction of imitated products or services, which are representative measures. This is a practical way to recover damages and prevent similar cases in the future. In addition, if the other party's intention is clear or the scale of damage caused by imitation is substantial, criminal prosecution (e.g., obstruction of business, obstruction of business by computer equipment) should also be considered. Unlike civil lawsuits, criminal proceedings involve the direct intervention of investigative agencies, which can exert strong pressure on the other party and also serve as a negotiation tool to lead to an early settlement. Law firm Veat provided close cooperation with the client throughout the process, from drafting the demand letter to subsequent civil and criminal response strategies, providing legal advice to avoid unnecessary disputes and focus on their core business. Law firm Veat provides practical legal advice to startups facing imitation problems in stages, from drafting a demand letter to subsequent civil and criminal responses. Responding to imitation businesses should be approached strategically, not emotionally, and seeking advice from experts is the best way to reduce disputes and focus on business. If you need legal advice regarding startups, copycats, imitation businesses, or the Act on the Prevention of Unfair Competition or demand letters, please feel free to contact Law firm Veat. This business case can also be viewed on the Law firm Veat blog below. - Imitation Businesses (Copycats) Targeting Startups, Response under the Act on the Prevention of Unfair Competition Thank you. Law firm Veat
[Law firm Veat] Messages to Korean Companies from Lessons Related to EU Functional Food Regulations
Law firm Veat published a column on the importance of personal information protection, cyber security, and legal responsibility for companies in the health functional food industry to the startup-focused media platform Platum. This column focused on the importance of health data protection and the challenges for Korean companies to respond to the global regulatory environment, highlighting major cases that arose under the EU’s personal information protection regulations (GDPR). In particular, the case where REWE was fined 8 million euros for using health functional food data for marketing, Doorstep Dispensaree, which was sanctioned for abandoning patient records, and Centric Health, which suffered ransomware damage due to a security breach, are sending a serious warning to all companies handling health data regardless of industry. It also emphasizes that health data should be treated as sensitive personal information rather than simple purchase history, explaining that GDPR designates it as 'special category data' and strongly protects it. As core response strategies that Korean companies must fulfill to survive and grow in the global market, it proposes △Legal compliance at the GDPR level △Strengthening data encryption and security systems △Clear consent procedures and transparent data operation △Regular security audits and risk diagnostics △Strengthening internal and external capabilities through collaboration with experts. [This link] allows you to check the details of this column. Law firm Veat specializes in providing legal advice on personal information protection, cyber security, AI and big data utilization across the digital healthcare and health functional food industries. It helps companies stably achieve both goals of data protection and trust building through practical and systematic advice based on a risk diagnosis based on company-specific personal information flow, policy formulation, contract review, consent form design, and supervisory authority response. Joo-hyeong, head of the Food Regulatory Consulting Team at Law firm Veat, is a Doctor of Law and a domestic and international food regulatory expert, and has served as a visiting professor at the Food Safety Regulatory Science Department of Chung-Ang University and the Policy Research Office of the Food Safety Information Agency. He holds US FSVP, PCHF-PCQI/FSPCA qualifications and has a broad understanding and practical experience in global food and data regulation response. Companies in healthcare, wellness services or health functional food platforms, businesses or other areas requiring legal risk management and personal information protection are welcome to contact Law firm Veat at any time. Thank you. Law firm Veat
Director appointment, preliminary review of the necessity of merger control notification is essential.
Law firm Veat received a request from AI startup Company A (hereinafter "the client") to review the need for a business combination filing. Recently, in the process of startup investment and M&A (Mergers and Acquisitions), external investment and changes in the board of directors are frequently occurring. In particular, when a large company participates as an investor and appoints a director nominated by the company or an existing director retires, the obligation to file a business combination may arise under the Fair Trade Act, so a legal review is necessary in such cases. Law firm Veat thoroughly reviewed the client's determination of whether a business combination filing is required under the Fair Trade Act based on changes in the board of directors and changes in the total number of directors. The Importance of Business Combination Filing The Business Combination Filing System is a key procedure under the Fair Trade Act to preliminarily check the possibility of limiting market competition. When certain conditions are met, such as mergers, stock acquisitions, and concurrent offices, a filing must be made with the Fair Trade Commission. Failure to comply with the filing obligation may result in sanctions such as fines, corrective measures, and criminal penalties, and there is also a significant risk of reputational damage and additional costs for the company. In particular, startups or medium-sized enterprises should thoroughly review the need for a filing even if they appear to be merely personnel changes when raising external investment and changing the composition of the board of directors, as this may constitute a business combination. A lack of understanding of the Business Combination Filing Guidelines and related laws can lead to adverse consequences, so it is important to seek advice from professionals to minimize risks. Potential for Concurrent Offices by a Large Company, Occurrence of Filing Obligation The business combination filing system under the Fair Trade Act applies not only to M&A (Mergers and Acquisitions) but also to changes in organizational structure, such as concurrent offices that meet certain conditions. In particular, when a large company is involved as a party, the scope in which it may be deemed a business combination is interpreted more broadly. According to the Fair Trade Commission's [Business Combination Filing Guidelines], a structure in which a large company appoints an employee or director of another company as a director may be deemed a business combination, and a filing obligation may arise if certain criteria are met. For example, it is common in startup investments for an investor to inject capital into an investee company and acquire a certain stake, and at the same time, designate employees of the investor as directors to enter the board of directors. In this case, if the investor is a large company and the designated director is an incumbent employee of the investor, there is a possibility that it may fall under one of the requirements for a business combination under the Fair Trade Act. <Key Elements to Consider When Determining the Need for Business Combination Filing>
Company headquarters relocation, registration procedures are as follows!
Law firm Veat received a request from healthcare company A (hereinafter referred to as "the client") and proceeded with the registration of the relocation of the main office. Relocation of the Main Office, Why is Registration Necessary?
[IT Litigation] 7 Contract Conditions to Reduce Disputes When Drafting Software Service Contracts
Software is utilized for various purposes, including internal system construction, customer service automation, and development of data analysis tools. Consequently, the demand for software service contracts outsourced to external development companies has rapidly increased. However, despite the frequent execution of these contracts, disputes often arise. This is because, when contract conditions are unclear or vaguely stated, various issues such as development delays, defects, and intellectual property rights attribution can lead to disputes. Unlike typical product sales, software service contracts vary in development scope and deliverables for each project, and there is significant uncertainty in the development process. Therefore, to prevent disputes and ensure the successful completion of projects, it is essential to clearly define contract conditions. In particular, when development schedules are delayed, responsibility, compensation for defects in deliverables, ownership of development results, and the scope of maintenance must be specifically agreed upon in advance to avoid subsequent legal disputes. It is crucial to detail these aspects in the contract. Contract conditions that must be included in software service contracts Software development contracts should at least include the following items in detail. 1. Scope of Work Definition If the scope of work is not specifically defined in a software service contract, disputes may arise when additional development requests occur. Therefore, the contract should explicitly state the software’s functionality and requirements to be developed, and should avoid broad expressions such as “website construction” or “ERP system development.” Instead, it should be specified by screen and function unit, along with the technical stack and development methods. It is also advisable to define the submission method for intermediate deliverables and step-by-step results. 2. Development Schedule and Delay Responsibility Because development schedules are often delayed, it is important to clarify the development period and responsibility for delays. The project schedule (start date, milestones, expected completion date) should be specified, and the content of responsibility (penalty, etc.) when a schedule delay occurs, the scope within which a delay may be recognized, and regulations to hold responsibility for delays due to development delays should be defined. 3. Deliverable Inspection and Delivery Method If the inspection criteria for deliverables are not clear, disputes may arise regarding the quality of the results provided by the development company. The form (source code, technical documentation, etc.), delivery method, and inspection procedure for deliverables should be specified, the inspection deadline and completion criteria should be set, and the obligation and method for revision should be defined if the inspection fails. 4. Defect Liability Period and Maintenance Scope After software development is completed, bug fixes and maintenance may be required for a certain period. Therefore, contract conditions for defect liability and maintenance must be clearly stated in the contract. The scope, method, and period of defect liability should be defined, the scope and cost calculation criteria for maintenance should be determined, and procedures for responding to emergency maintenance should be established. 5. Intellectual Property Rights Attribution Intellectual property rights attribution is an important factor in software service contracts. When a contract is concluded, the ownership of the software’s source code and copyright must be clarified. The owner of the copyright of the development results should be specified, the provision of source code and usage restrictions should be determined, and the application of open-source licenses should be confirmed. 6. Confidentiality Obligation Because sensitive information may be shared during the software development process, a confidentiality clause should be included to prevent information leaks. The confidentiality obligation of the parties to the contract should be specified, the scope and protection period for confidential information should be set, and regulations for compensation in case of breach of confidentiality obligations should be established. 7. Contract Termination or Cancellation Clause If the conditions for termination and cancellation of the contract are not clarified, disputes may be difficult to resolve. The reasons and procedures for contract termination should be specified, the regulations for costs and penalties arising from termination should be determined, and the obligations of both parties after termination should be organized. Applicable Law for Software Service Contracts Software service contracts are not simple service contracts, but complex contracts that can be interpreted in various ways from a legal perspective. The Supreme Court, while explaining the nature of a manufacturing supply contract, found that it was a mixture of a commissioned work aspect and a sales aspect (Supreme Court Decision of June 28, 1996, 94da42976). In particular, in the case of software development tailored to a specific customer’s request, there is a high probability that the development results will be a substitute for only that customer, which means that it has the nature of a commissioned work contract. In this case, the provisions of the Civil Code regarding commissioned work shall apply, which may lead to differences in interpretation regarding defect liability, responsibility for non-performance, and conditions for contract cancellation. Law firm Veat, certified by the Korea Bar Association, includes partner attorneys Baek Seung-cheol and An Il-woon, as well as attorneys from engineering backgrounds, and provides specialized legal services in IT and software fields. They have experience advising numerous startups, development companies, and platform companies. They provide in-depth understanding of legal issues throughout the IT industry, such as software service contracts, license agreements, open-source compliance, Personal Information Protection Act, and Information and Communications Network Act, and provide practical solutions. From defining the scope of work during the development stage to responding to disputes after delivery, protecting against technology leakage and intellectual property rights, they provide customized advice on complex issues where technology and law intersect, minimizing business risks for clients. If you require legal advice regarding IT and software, please do not hesitate to contact Law firm Veat. Thank you. Law firm Veat