Case Studies
[Consultation] Review of structures and laws to be considered for changes in corporate governance.
Veat is a corporation and Law firm Veat undertook a restructuring to change its corporate structure, establishing new subsidiaries and converting existing subsidiaries into holding companies. The Fair Trade Commission designates large business groups with total assets exceeding 5 trillion won, and among these designated large business groups, those with total assets exceeding 10 trillion won are designated as closed business groups. Designated as a large business group, companies must disclose corporate group status, large internal transactions, and important matters of privately-held subsidiaries, and when designated as a closed business group, they are subject to stricter regulations, including restrictions on cross-shareholding and circular shareholding.(《Competition Act and Act on Fair Trade》Article 14,《Fair Trade Act》Article 14) Accordingly, Veat reviewed whether any regulations exist to restrict A, a company with assets exceeding a certain scale, from undertaking such a corporate restructuring as described above, and if so, reviewed the requirements that it must meet to legally carry out the corporate restructuring. Law firm Veat helps clients minimize legal risks by thoroughly reviewing various regulations applicable in the course of business operations and providing legitimate solutions to ensure clients can proceed in the direction that best serves their interests. If you need legal advice regarding corporate restructuring and compliance with the Fair Trade Act, please contact Law firm Veat at any time. Thank you.
[News] Senior Attorney An-il Moon Receives Commendation Award from Minister of Culture, Sports and Tourism.
Veat Law Firm partner An Il-won received an award from the Ministry of Culture, Sports and Tourism at the ‘2020 Copyright and Open Source SW License Conference’ on October 28th. Senior Partner An Il-won has diligently performed activities to promote awareness of open source software licenses and was recognized for his contribution to fostering a correct copyright usage culture. Senior Partner An Il-won, who comes from a background as a developer at a large corporation, understands both ‘IT/Technology’ and ‘Law’ due to his academic background in a STEM field and practical experience, allowing him to quickly and accurately grasp client needs and perform his duties as a corporate advisory/legal counsel. Thank you. Veat Law Firm
[202010] Monthly Veat 10th Issue_Back Ad, False Exaggeration Advertisement
Law firm Veat
[Consulting] Veat, a leading AI company, conducted legal review of investment agreements during a $40 million investment fundraising process.
Law firm Veat conducted legal review of the investment agreement in the process of Law firm Veat attracting investment from an AI company startup A. Startup A requested legal advice regarding whether there were unfavorable clauses in the investment agreement received from the accelerator, and how to amicably resolve them if there were, as well as methods for dealing with them. Accordingly, Law firm Veat reviewed the investment agreement for unfavorable clauses on behalf of Startup A, such as tag-along right, information reporting obligations for investors, the right to appoint board members by investors, the scope of priority in the distribution of residual assets in liquidation, and joint liability. Law firm Veat provided a legal review opinion based on this review. Based on its experience conducting various investments and M&A with multiple venture capital firms and startup accelerators, Law firm Veat is providing consulting services. Please contact Law firm Veat if you need advice regarding the drafting and review of investment agreements. Thank you. Law firm Veat.
[Consultation] Review of Stock Option Exercise Rights
Law firm Veat advised A Venture Company’s B employee on whether an agreement to waive stock options (stock options) granted by B employee is valid, considering that B employee retired within two years without fault. The Venture Company’s B employee retired earlier than the required two-year term of employment granted by the company, without any fault. Therefore, A Venture Company sought to reach an agreement with B employee to waive the stock options (stock options) granted at the time of employment, and asked for advice on the validity of this agreement. According to the Commercial Act, executives must be employed for at least two years from the date the stock options are approved by the shareholders’ meeting in order to actually exercise them and acquire shares. (Article 340(4)(1) of the Commercial Act) However, even if within two years, in the case of a listed company, if an employee retired or resigned within two years after receiving company stock options due to a non-faulty reason, they can still exercise the stock options. (Article 542(3) of the Commercial Act) Nevertheless, in the case of an unlisted company, if an employee retired or resigned within two years after receiving company stock options due to a non-faulty reason, such as dismissal, the stock options cannot be exercised. (Decision of the Supreme Court on March 24, 2011, Case No. 2010Da85027) Law firm Veat first reviewed the stock option (stock options) agreement between A Venture Company and B employee, and then reviewed the validity of the waiver and settlement agreement on stock options based on the purpose of the stock options. Stock options are intended to provide employees with an economic incentive to work hard for the company, and are used accordingly, as they are specifically regulated by the Commercial Act and the Venture Company Act (Special Act for the Promotion of Venture Companies) regarding the conditions and duration of exercise. Law firm Veat possesses abundant case review experience related to stock options (stock options) and offers stock option agreement forms and explanatory manuals free of charge based on its accumulated experience. You can refer to these forms and manuals if you need them, and feel free to contact us if you require further review. Thank you.
[Legal Review] Comprehensive Collaboration Agreement for Technology Development
The freelance developer, Mr. Kim, was in the process of finalizing a comprehensive collaboration agreement with Company B to jointly conduct research and development work. In response, Mr. Kim consulted with Veat Law Firm for legal review of the Company B comprehensive collaboration agreement. Veat Law Firm had specified that the comprehensive collaboration agreement did not clearly define the specific contract period or termination date, instead stating ‘to maintain the contract until the agreed-upon period.’ We advised clients to clearly specify the date. In addition, we reviewed the vague wording within the comprehensive collaboration agreement regarding payments and other matters, providing review opinions after clarifying the language. If you need a review of a technology development contract, please contact Veat Law Firm. Thank you. Veat Law Firm
[Leading Lawyer 2020=Startup] Choi Seongho Attorney | Veat Law Firm
A graduate of Seoul National University’s Department of Computer Science, attorney Seong-ho Choi initially focused on IT-related cases before expanding his area of expertise to startups and venture capital. He is one of the leading corporate lawyers, and he is leading Law firm Veat. Attorney Choi’s Law firm Veat’s M&A rankings for the first half of this year are 9th according to Bloomberg’s ranking. Looking at Attorney Choi’s work files, we see advice given on various types of transactions appropriate for startups, such as investing in early-stage companies as a priority and then determining the equity stake of the initial investor if subsequent investments are made, conducting a “Flip” by establishing overseas subsidiaries and converting them into the parent company of domestic subsidiaries, and so on. Source : Legal Times [Leading Lawyer 2020=Startup] Attorney Seong-ho Choi | Veat
[Consultation] Drafting a response to an unfair dismissal claim.
Law firm Veat conducted a legal review of the response letter regarding an unfair dismissal claim. A Co. requested advice from Veat regarding a response letter submitted to the Regional Labor Relations Commission in response to a claim for unfair dismissal filed by former employee B. A Co. was in a very difficult situation because B, who voluntarily resigned, did not file a resignation letter after his departure, and there were no particular issues at the time of his retirement. Therefore, Veat reviewed the response letter arguing that it did not constitute an unfair dismissal under the and provided A Co. with information on possible arguments in case the initial argument was not accepted, to prevent an unfavorable ruling. In cases of unfair dismissal, it is often necessary to determine the circumstances and statements of the parties involved, so we recommend seeking advice from experts with extensive experience. Law firm Veat provides comprehensive advice from establishing internal structures for prevention to identifying key issues for resolving disputes, based on its experience advising over five hundred companies on human resources and labor matters. If you need advice regarding unfair dismissal or human resources and labor issues within a company, please contact Law firm Veat. Thank you.
[Korea Economic Daily] How about "startup recruitment" amid a drought of public sector job openings?
Some startups have unclear salary or employment systems. The internship system is most frequently used by startups. It is a system that allows employment to be rejected based on work performance for a period of three months. A lawyer at Veat Law Firm said, “It is good to add clauses such as ‘Use period extension is impossible unless a legitimate reason is needed’ or ‘Dismissal is impossible due to an improper reason’ to separate contracts.” For more detailed article content, please refer to the Hankyung News article ‘Startup Job Hunting’ – How about it in the midst of a Hankyung News Recruitment Drought? Thank you. Veat Law Firm
[Legal Times] M&A transactions rebound sharply in the third quarter…number of transactions compared to the previous year increased.
Veat, WeirdAdvice, Delight ‘Top 10’ Entry Due to the shock of the COVID-19 pandemic, M&A transaction volumes in the Korean market, which decreased by nearly 40% compared to the previous year in the first half of this year, rebounded significantly in the third quarter. According to Bloomberg’s tally, the cumulative M&A transaction performance in the Korean market in the third quarter totaled 1,249 deals, amounting to approximately $452 billion, which was 23.7% higher than the same period of the previous year. Although transaction value decreased by more than 40% compared to the same period of the previous year in the first half of the year, it decreased by 2.7% compared to the cumulative third quarter of the previous year based on the cumulative third quarter. Source: Legal Times article ‘M&A Transactions, Significant Rebound in the Third Quarter…Transaction Volume Increased Compared to the Previous Year’