[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.