Enforcing Punitive & Liquidated Damages Awards against Korean Companies via Contracts with Foreign Subsidiaries of Korean Companies

A recent amendment of the Korean Civil Procedure Act added Article 217-2.  The Amendment has codified a holding by the Seoul Central District Court and other Korean courts noting, in part, that Korean Courts may refuse to “recognize foreign damage awards that clearly exceed amounts considered reasonable in Korea in violation of good morals and the social order of Korea” (99 KaHap 14496, S. Cent. Distr. Court, 10/20/2000). The Amendment allows Korean Courts, in Korea, the power to not recognize a damage award that the Korean Court’s perceives as “excessive.”  This standard-less “standard” leaves much wiggle room for Korean Courts. A typical situation is a case where an American importer sues a Korean conglomerate in a U.S. Court and damages are awarded to the U.S. company.  The damages may include liquidated, punitive and non-“actual” damages.  The American importer, then, attempts to enforce the judgment in Korea. There is a simple

Continue reading

Liquidated (Penalty) Damages Necessary in Most Korean NDA and Non-Compete Agreements

For any company engaged in negotiations, agreements, pre-M & A due diligence, OEM outsourcing or other activities with a Korean business or individuals that may lead to you disclosing your companies intellectual property, know-how or other proprietary information, always include in your no-competition, non-use, non-circumvention and non-compete agreements a liquidated damages (Penalty Damages) clause.  Without a Penalty Damages Clause – good luck in proving damages when a breach occurs. If the other party refuses to sign the clause, this is good sign that the party will breach. The clause is of course, only triggered when a breach occurs. I, recently, had a client that was very worried about losing “goodwill.” Easy solution, blame the “lawyer.” For companies that are not engaged in active, continuous and substantial business in Korea, the chance of finding evidence of damage, after a breach, is remote – best. The reason stems from proof of market potential in

Continue reading

Liquidated Damages vs. Penalty Damages: Korean Contract Law Basics

Liquidated Damages v. Penalty Damages in Korea In Korea, liquidated damage clauses in South Korean contracts may be invalidated if the liquidated damage amount is deemed, by a Korean court of law, as “unduly excessive.” (Civil Act Art. 398(2)). Article 398 of the Civil Act may be found below.  Korean Liquidated damages law is governed by the Civil Act of Korea and related Korean Law. However, if an agreement, in Korea, notes a “penalty,” the amount of the “penalty is presumed to be determined in advance of the damages” (Civil Act Art. 398(4)) and is presumed valid.  Of course, the difference between “liquidated” and “penalty” damages, thus, would seem critical.  However, presently, in Korea, form is prevailing, in most cases, over substance. Liquidated damages, according to Korean courts, are damages where the parties contract with the intent to compensate the non-breaching party for the actual damages caused.  While, a penalty

Continue reading