BlogsCryptoKOL Promotion and Unfair Trading Liability in Token Marketing Agreements
Structuring control over promotional content, trading restrictions on token compensation, disclosure of interests, and liability for breachWhen a token project engages KOLs (key opinion leaders) and marketing agencies for promotion, the content of the promotion and the compensation structure may raise issues of fraudulent unfair trading under Korea's Act on the Protection of Virtual Asset Users. If tokens paid as compensation are sold immediately after the promotion, or unfounded price forecasts are circulated, not only the KOL but also the project may become the subject of an investigation.This article summarizes the key points to review in token marketing agreements: control over promotional content, lock-ups and trading restrictions on token compensation, disclosure of interests, and allocation of liability for breach.1. Unfair Trading Rules Applicable to KOL PromotionThe Act on the Protection of Virtual Asset Users prohibits any person from using fraudulent means, or seeking profit
2026-11-09- BlogsCriminal
Electronic Financial Transactions Act Violations in Korea: Penalties and Response After Referral to the Public Prosecution Service
Penalty requirements for handing over a bankbook or debit card, procedures after referral to the Public Prosecution Service, and the distinction from aiding and abetting fraudPeople are sometimes questioned by the police on suspicion of violating the Electronic Financial Transactions Act after sending a debit card to obtain a loan, or after handing over a bankbook or debit card in response to an offer of a part-time job or a fee for the use of their account. If the account was then used for voice phishing, a charge of aiding and abetting fraud may also arise.Referral of a case to the Public Prosecution Service does not by itself mean that criminal punishment is certain. Which provision applies, and whether an offense is established, depends on what access medium was handed over and how, and on whether there was any promise of consideration or awareness that it would be used for a crime.1. Meaning of an Access Medium Under the Electronic Financial Transactions ActA violation of the Elec
2026-11-09 - BlogsCorporate & Biz
Rights Warranties and Personal Data Responsibility in AI Training Data Agreements
Structuring the scope of the license, copyright warranties and indemnities, personal data responsibilities, and post-termination treatment of modelsIn agreements to supply or purchase training data for AI companies, rights infringement or personal data issues may surface after the data has already been used for training. Korea's Framework Act on Artificial Intelligence has been in force since January 22, 2026, but rights issues concerning training data are still assessed under the Copyright Act and the Personal Information Protection Act.This article summarizes the key points to review in training data agreements: the scope of the license, copyright warranties and indemnities, responsibility for personal data processing, and the treatment of data and models after termination.1. Rules Governing Training Data AgreementsThe Framework Act on Artificial Intelligence has been in force since January 22, 2026. However, the Act focuses on matters such as labeling generative AI outputs and the o
2026-11-09 - BlogsCross-border · Dispute Resolution
EU Data Act and Data Clauses in IoT Supply Agreements
Reviewing the data holder role, allocation of design costs, unfair contractual terms, and trade secret protectionThe EU Data Act has applied since September 12, 2025. It grants users of connected products a right to access the data those products generate and regulates unfair contractual terms in data agreements between businesses. Korean manufacturers supplying devices to the EU market need to revisit how data-related roles and responsibilities are allocated in their supply and distribution agreements with EU partners.Devices placed on the EU market after September 12, 2026 are subject to a design obligation premised on user data access, and the unfair terms rules may apply from September 12, 2027 to long-term agreements concluded before September 12, 2025. This article summarizes the key clauses to review in supply agreements.1. Impact of the Data Act on Supply AgreementsThe Data Act applies to connected products placed on the EU market and to related services. Even if the manufactur
2026-11-09 - BlogsCross-border · Dispute Resolution
Overseas Contract Manufacturing Agreements: Mold Ownership and Liability for Quality Defects
Structuring mold ownership and return, quality standards, notice deadlines, and intellectual property protectionWhen a company outsources production of its products to an overseas factory, core assets such as molds and drawings remain at the factory. If the agreement does not address who owns the molds and how they are returned, production may stop when the company tries to switch factories. If quality standards and defect notice deadlines are unclear, disputes arise over who bears the resulting losses.Korea, China, and Vietnam are all Contracting States to the United Nations Convention on Contracts for the International Sale of Goods (CISG), so the Convention may apply to contract manufacturing transactions. This article summarizes the key points to review in the mold, quality, delivery, and intellectual property clauses of a contract manufacturing agreement.1. Rules Governing Contract Manufacturing AgreementsKorea, China, and Vietnam are all Contracting States to the CISG. Unless the
2026-11-06 - BlogsCross-border · Dispute Resolution
The Revised EU Product Liability Directive and Liability Allocation Clauses in Export Supply Agreements
Rethinking liable parties, software update obligations, and recourse between businessesThe revised EU Product Liability Directive (Directive (EU) 2024/2853) applies to products placed on the market after December 9, 2026. Software is now included within the scope of products, and for products made by manufacturers outside the EU, the range of liable parties within the EU, such as importers and authorized representatives, has been expanded.Because liability to injured persons cannot be limited or excluded by contract, the role of a supply agreement is to determine the final allocation of costs between businesses. Companies supplying EU customers should review the clauses in their supply agreements on liable parties, software updates, recourse, and insurance.1. Timing and Scope of the Revised DirectiveThe new Directive applies to products placed on the EU market or put into service after December 9, 2026. The previous directive continues to apply to products placed on the market before t
2026-11-05 - BlogsCrypto
Simple Agreements for Future Tokens (SAFTs): Delivery Conditions and Termination for Delayed Token Issuance
Reviewing delivery timing and conditions, grounds for termination, and enforceabilityA Simple Agreement for Future Tokens (SAFT) is a contract under which an investor pays first and receives tokens to be issued in the future. If the token generation event (TGE) is delayed, whether the investment can be recovered depends on the delivery timing, conditions, and termination grounds set out in the agreement.Responding to a delayed issuance requires reviewing the interpretation of the contract wording, the requirements for termination and restitution, the securities analysis, and cross-border dispute resolution procedures together. This article summarizes the key points that affect delivery conditions and refund claims.1. Structure of a SAFT and the Investor's RightsUnder a SAFT, the investor pays first and, once the project later issues tokens, receives a set quantity or proportion of those tokens. What the investor receives is often not equity but a contractual right to demand future deli
2026-11-05 - BlogsCross-border · Dispute Resolution
Export Contracts and Standby Letters of Credit: Drawing Conditions and Expiry Design
Linking payment terms with demand documents and the expiry of the standby letter of creditIn export transactions on open account terms, a standby letter of credit (SBLC) is used to protect against the risk that the buyer fails to pay. However, a sufficient guarantee amount or the name of an issuing bank alone does not guarantee recovery of payment in each transaction.Companies should check whether the payment requirements, demand documents, and expiry in the export contract and the standby document are consistent. This article summarizes the key points to review at the first shipment of a new transaction and when transaction terms change.1. Distinguishing the Export Contract from the Standby Letter of CreditA standby letter of credit is distinct from a commercial letter of credit, which is used as an ordinary means of paying for goods. The U.S. Department of Commerce describes it as an instrument that can be drawn upon in the event of a contractual default, such as an importer's failur
2026-11-04 - BlogsCrypto
Staking Service Agreements: Slashing Losses and the Operator's Liability
Defining validator operation duties, loss allocation, and asset recovery proceduresA staking service agreement entrusts the operation of validators for a company's digital assets to an outside provider and sets out operational duties, fees, asset control, and liability for losses. Expected reward rates and fees alone are not enough to evaluate how the agreement allocates risk.In transactions that outsource Ethereum validator operations, the distinction between slashing and other losses, the scope of the operator's fault and exemptions, and withdrawal rights and exit procedures must be reviewed together with the actual technical structure. The same structure does not necessarily apply to other networks or custodial products.1. Structure of Delegated Staking and ControlWhen outsourcing Ethereum validator operations, the first step is to confirm whether the service is custodial and how control over the assets is structured. Not all digital asset networks use the same penalty or withdrawal
2026-11-04 - BlogsCross-border · Dispute Resolution
EU CBAM Steel Supply Agreements: Emissions Data and Cost Settlement
Companies supplying steel to EU importers may be asked to provide the basis for calculating product emissions, verification materials, and information on carbon prices paid. If the contract does not specify when and to what extent this information will be provided, disputes over additional verification and costs may arise after delivery.Statutory obligor: The EU importer or indirect customs representative bears the CBAM declaration and certificate obligations. A Korean supplier does not automatically become the statutory obligor.Contractual cooperation: Declaring actual emissions may require production facility data and verification evidence, so the scope of data to be provided and verification costs should be set out in the contract.Cost allocation: Certificate prices, additional costs caused by data errors attributable to a party, and cooperation in evidencing and deducting carbon prices already paid in a third country should each be treated separately.1. CBAM Obligations and the Rol
2026-11-03 - BlogsCross-border · Dispute Resolution
DDP Terms in U.S. Export Contracts and Entitlement to IEEPA Tariff Refunds
Now that refunds of U.S. tariffs imposed under the International Emergency Economic Powers Act (IEEPA) have begun, exporters that bore tariffs under DDP terms should review the importer of record, entitlement to refunds and interest, settlement agreements, and contract amendment clauses. This article summarizes those points.1. Overview of the IEEPA Tariff Refund ProcessFollowing the U.S. Supreme Court's ruling, the U.S. Court of International Trade ordered U.S. Customs and Border Protection (CBP) to establish a refund process for all IEEPA tariffs. CBP has created the CAPE function within its electronic customs system and is refunding duties together with interest.The refunds cover reciprocal tariffs and other duties imposed under IEEPA. Tariffs imposed under Section 232 of the Trade Expansion Act or Section 301 of the Trade Act are not covered by this process. Companies should first identify the legal basis of the tariffs imposed on their products.Refunds are not paid automatically. T
2026-11-02 - BlogsCrypto
USDT Frozen After the Binance Hack: Procedures for Release
This article explains, for OTC and P2P traders whose USDT received in ordinary transactions was frozen after the Binance hack, the release procedures that depend on who imposed the freeze, the materials needed to show good faith, and how to prepare for contact from investigators.1. Timeline of the Binance HackThe hack occurred at around 20:05 UTC on October 29 (early morning of October 30, Korea time), and Binance announced it on October 30. According to the announcement, approximately USD 6.3 billion was withdrawn without authorization from several hot wallets over about 20 minutes.Binance stated that its initial investigation indicated that a compromised engineer's laptop had been used to access an internal withdrawal service, and that it was investigating additional points of compromise. It also said that user balances would not be reduced and that losses would be covered by its user protection fund and company funds.Restoring Binance users' balances and the position of third partie
2026-11-02
