最新消息

On March 12, 2026, Hahn & Company Air Services Holdings entered into a share purchase agreement with Korean Air, under which Hahn & Company agreed to sell its entire stake, representing 80% of the total issued shares, in Korean Air C&D Services Co., Ltd. (“KC&D”) to Korean Air for KRW 750 billion. The transaction is expected to close after June 2026. 

Lee & Ko advised Hahn & Company from the earliest stages of the transaction and led the deal throughout its entirety, providing comprehensive and timely advice across every phase. This included reviewing the transaction structure, preparing responses and materials for the buyer’s requests for information, developing negotiation strategy, and conducting legal analysis of the relevant issues in connection with the buy-side due diligence process, as well as drafting, negotiating, and executing the transaction documentation, including the MOU, NDA, and share purchase agreement. 

Given the circumstances of the parties, the transaction required a number of complex issues to be resolved within a tight timeframe. The parties held differing positions on key points of negotiation, including the purchase price adjustment, the refinancing structure for the acquisition financing, and special indemnification provisions, calling for careful and deliberate negotiation. Throughout this process, Lee & Ko worked closely with the client to understand its objectives, proposed practical alternatives and optimal solutions, and helped strike a balanced outcome in the negotiations, contributing to the successful execution of the agreement within a limited timeframe.
 

Lee & Ko successfully secured a full acquittal at both the trial and appellate levels for Mirae Asset Global Investments Co., Ltd. and Mirae Asset Life Insurance Co., Ltd. (collectively, “Mirae Affiliates”) in a criminal case alleging violations of the Monopoly Regulation and Fair Trade Act (“MRFTA”).

The prosecution alleged that the Mirae Affiliates unfairly allocated business to golf courses operated by an affiliate with a high ownership ratio held by a specially related party, thereby conferring undue benefits. The trial court rendered a full acquittal on January 16, 2025, and Lee & Ko prevailed again on appeal on October 24, 2025. The appellate ruling is particularly noteworthy given that related administrative litigation, after dismissal by the Seoul High Court, remains pending before the Supreme Court.

The principal issue in the criminal proceedings was whether the Mirae Affiliates possessed the requisite criminal intent to confer, or to tolerate the conferral of, undue benefits upon a specially related party through the use of group-owned golf courses.

Lee & Ko argued that establishing criminal intent with respect to abstract legal concepts under the MRFTA requires strict and careful proof. The firm emphasized that criminal liability should not be imposed where corporate group-level decisions reflect reasonable business judgment. Lee & Ko demonstrated that the use of group-owned golf courses formed part of a rational asset management strategy and that there was no intent or acceptance of conferring undue benefits.

Through meticulous review of documentary evidence and extensive witness examination, Lee & Ko successfully established the absence of criminal intent. The decision is particularly significant given the limited criminal precedent concerning the conferral of undue benefits to specially related parties. The appellate court clarified that criminal intent cannot be inferred solely from formal considerations, such as a high ownership ratio of a specially related party or the mere potential for indirect advantages in management succession, and underscored the need for caution in recognizing intent in the context of abstract statutory concepts under the MRFTA.

 

Lee&Ko successfully advised Glenwood Credit in connection with the following transactions which occurred side by side: (i) an investment transaction pursuant to which Glenwood Credit provided a loan in an aggregate amount equal to KRW 600 billion to Megazone Corporation (such entity being the parent company of Megazone Cloud Corporation, a provider of cloud managed services) and acquired exchangeable bonds issued by Megazone Corporation in an aggregate amount equal to KRW 200 billion (the “Investment Transaction”), and (ii) an acquisition financing transaction undertaken by Glenwood Credit as borrower for the purposes of (among others) financing in part the Investment Transaction (the “Acquisition Financing Transaction”).

The Investment Transaction, in which Glenwood Credit participated as a bondholder, comprised a loan transaction with Megazone Corporation and an exchangeable bond acquisition transaction with Megazone Corporation, both of which were implemented on a concurrent basis. This called for specialized expertise in both asset classes (loans and exchangeable bonds) as well as detailed review and analysis of the terms and conditions of the relevant documentation and their precise interactions with one another from a documentary perspective. In addition to the Investment Transaction, the Acquisition Financing Transaction was pursued simultaneously in order to raise in part the funds necessary to complete the Investment Transaction. This resulted in a highly complex financing and investment structure and the preparation and negotiation stages of these transactions necessarily occupied an extended period of time. In particular, in order to close on time three separate finance and investment transactions that were inherently related to one another, it was necessary to harmonise terms across different instruments to an appropriate degree and to coordinate effectively the interests of the involved parties. This in turn required meticulous legal expertise and responsive project management, both of which Lee&Ko successfully delivered.

From the structuring stage of the transaction through to financial close, Lee&Ko provided comprehensive legal advice and assistance to Glenwood Credit, in its capacities as bondholder under the Investment Transaction and the borrower under the Acquisition Financing Transaction, including preparation of the loan agreement, exchangeable bond acquisition agreement and acquisition financing loan agreement, negotiation of terms with its counterparties and their counsel, and preparation and review of the closing deliverables. Based on its extensive experience and expertise accumulated through advising on numerous acquisition financing transactions, Lee&Ko devised an optimal financing structure that balanced the needs of the bondholder, the bond issuer and the acquisition financing lenders, and successfully supported the timely closing of each financing transaction despite the tight and rapidly evolving transaction schedule.
 

Lee & Ko advised Petrico Partners PE on the acquisition, through LAAA Investment (“SPC”), of a controlling stake in Kakao Games, a KOSDAQ-listed company, leading the transaction from the execution of the share purchase agreement, new share subscription agreement, and convertible bond subscription agreement on March 24, 2026, through to closing on June 19, 2026. The transaction consisted of (i) the SPC's purchase of 18,107,732 existing shares of Kakao Games from Kakao, the seller, for approximately KRW 248 billion, (ii) the SPC's subscription for 17,458,354 new shares issued by Kakao Games through a third-party allotment for approximately KRW 240 billion, and (iii) the SPC's subscription for approximately KRW 60 billion in unregistered, unsecured, privately placed convertible bonds issued by Kakao Games. Following closing, the SPC became the largest shareholder of Kakao Games, holding approximately 33.43%, with Kakao remaining as the second-largest shareholder, holding approximately 14.68%.

The transaction involved the acquisition of Kakao Games, a KOSDAQ-listed company, through an SPC jointly invested in with a strategic investor, requiring prompt coordination with the strategic investor on investment terms. The deal was also highly complex in structure, combining the subscription of new shares and convertible bonds issued by a listed company, which required careful review of the related legal issues and their reflection in both the transaction structure and the transaction documents.

Lee & Ko represented the SPC as buyer and successfully carried out a wide range of work across the transaction, including legal due diligence, drafting, review, revision, and negotiation support for the share purchase agreement, new share subscription agreement, convertible bond subscription agreement, and the acquisition financing loan and security agreements, negotiation of terms relating to W&I insurance, business combination filings, and coordination with the exchange on disclosure matters relating to the listed company.
 

Lee & Ko successfully represented Coinone in obtaining a court order staying the execution of a three-month partial business suspension imposed by the Commissioner of the Korea Financial Intelligence Unit (“KoFIU”).

On April 15, 2026, KoFIU imposed a three-month partial business suspension on Coinone, effective from April 29 through July 28, 2026, pursuant to Article 7(5)(3) of the Act on Reporting and Using Specified Financial Transaction Information, among other provisions, on the ground that Coinone had engaged in virtual asset transfer transactions with unregistered virtual asset service providers. The suspension prohibited Coinone from providing virtual asset transfer services (deposits and withdrawals) to newly registered customers. In response, Coinone filed an administrative action seeking the revocation of the disposition and concurrently applied for a stay of execution.

The key legal issues in this case were: (i) whether there was an urgent need to prevent irreparable harm; and (ii) whether Coinone’s claims on the merits were clearly without merit. In addition, (iii) the matter was exceptionally time-sensitive, as the application was submitted merely two days before the partial business suspension was scheduled to take effect.

Regarding issue (i), Lee & Ko emphasized that if the suspension were to take effect, Coinone would be precluded from acquiring new customers, resulting in an irrecoverable loss of competitive standing. Lee & Ko further argued that if the application were to be denied, the three-month suspension period would have already expired during the pendency of the merits proceedings, rendering any subsequent favorable judgment ineffective in remedying the resulting damages. Regarding issue (ii), Lee & Ko actively argued that Coinone had fully implemented all feasible measures available at the relevant time, thereby precluding any finding of “intent or gross negligence.” Furthermore, regarding point (iii), in light of the imminent effective date, Lee & Ko urgently moved the court to issue a provisional stay, successfully securing an interim stay order within a single day.

Following a thorough review, the court held that difficulties in acquiring new customers, the loss of market participation opportunities, and the impairment of business reputation constitute harm difficult to remedy through monetary compensation, thereby establishing an urgent need for a stay. The court also determined that Coinone’s arguments—including the absence of substantive grounds for the disposition—warranted full adjudication through the merits proceedings and could not be deemed clearly without merit. Accordingly, the court ordered that the effect of the disposition be stayed until 30 days after the date on which judgment is rendered in the merits action.

This case is significant in that Lee & Ko responded swiftly to an administrative disposition carrying severe operational restrictions immediately prior to its effective date, successfully obtaining a stay of execution. The decision provided meaningful and practical protection to Coinone’s ongoing operations pending a judicial determination on the lawfulness of the disposition, effectively precluding irreparable harm.
 

Lee & Ko advised HD Korea Shipbuilding & Offshore Engineering Co., Ltd., the intermediate holding company for the shipbuilding business of HD Hyundai Group, on its USD 1.55 billion overseas exchangeable bond offering. The bonds are exchangeable into common shares of HD Hyundai Heavy Industries Co., Ltd. held by HD Korea Shipbuilding & Offshore Engineering, and the offering was successfully completed amid strong interest from global investors in Korea’s shipbuilding industry. The transaction attracted significant market attention as a large-scale overseas exchangeable bond offering involving shares of a key listed subsidiary of one of Korea’s leading shipbuilding groups.

Overseas exchangeable bond offerings require comprehensive review of various Korean law issues, including disclosure requirements relating to the exchange property, determination of the exchange price, exchange procedures, foreign exchange regulations and capital markets regulations. Lee & Ko provided comprehensive legal advice to the issuer throughout the transaction, including Korean law review of the offering structure, review of transaction documents and the offering circular, and advice on disclosure and governmental approval matters. Following its advice on LG Chem’s USD 2 billion overseas exchangeable bond offering in 2025, Lee & Ko once again demonstrated its strong expertise in overseas equity-linked bond offerings by Korean companies through its successful representation in this large-scale transaction.

Lee & Ko’s IP & Technology Practice Group, representing Eugene Tech, successfully invalidated the patents of Japan’s Kokusai Electric (“Kokusai”) in a patent dispute concerning atomic layer deposition (“ALD”) equipment used in semiconductor processing.

In February 2024, Kokusai filed four patent infringement lawsuits against Eugene Tech in the Seoul Central District Court. The technology at issue related to semiconductor process equipment, and Kokusai brought the infringement suits based on patents spanning various fields, including process operation methods and equipment configurations.

Lee & Ko’s IP & Technology Group responded to the infringement suits by asserting non-infringement while safeguarding Eugene Tech’s trade secrets, and at the same time sought to invalidate Kokusai’s patents by filing invalidation actions against all four patents.

With respect to the patent relating to nozzle arrangement among Kokusai’s patents, in December 2024, the Intellectual Property Trial and Appeal Board (“IPTAB”) held that all of the claims Kokusai had asserted for infringement were invalid. Although Kokusai filed a suit to revoke this decision, the IP High Court rendered a judgment in May 2026 upholding the IPTAB’s determination. In addition, with respect to a patent relating to semiconductor processing, although the IPTAB dismissed Eugene Tech’s petition for an invalidation action, in the correction action that Kokusai filed to amend the scope of its patent claims, it was determined that the invention described in the corrected claims lacked inventive step compared to the prior art, thereby succeeding in effectively neutralizing Kokusai’s patent.

Accordingly, Eugene Tech has effectively neutralized two of Kokusai’s four patents, and by mounting effective invalidity arguments against the remaining two patents as well, it is successfully responding to Kokusai’s infringement claims. As a result, Eugene Tech is now positioned to continue expanding its competitiveness and influence in the market as a promising equipment company in the rapidly advancing semiconductor industry.

Lee & Ko’s IP & Technology Practice Group has been successfully representing Samsung Heavy Industries and another entity in a patent infringement lawsuit filed by Canada’s Steelhead LNG against Samsung Heavy Industries and the entity before the Seoul Central District Court in connection with the Canadian FLNG project being carried out by Samsung Heavy Industries and Canada’s Cedar LNG, thereby contributing to the smooth execution of the project.

Cedar FLNG is a nearshore FLNG model that receives natural gas supplied from onshore facilities and is capable of liquefying, storing, and offloading the gas. It is an ultra-large offshore plant, with a hull area 2.5 times the size of a soccer field and a launch weight of approximately 50,000 tons. With respect to the FLNG vessel being constructed by Samsung Heavy Industries, In December 2024, Steelhead filed a patent infringement lawsuit alleging infringement of two patents and seeking, among other relief, an injunction halting construction.

Lee & Ko’s IP & Technology Practice Group defended against the infringement lawsuit by asserting non-infringement, while at the same time filing invalidation actions against Steelhead’s patents. Although Steelhead responded by amending its patent claims, Lee & Ko’s effective invalidity arguments were accepted, and the Intellectual Property Trial and Appeal Board (“IPTAB”) held both patents to be invalid in May 2026. The IPTAB found not only that both patents lacked an inventive step compared to the prior art, but also that the amendments made during the prosecution process constituted the addition of new matter, and therefore held that grounds for invalidity existed independent of the lack of inventive step.

As both patents were successfully held invalid by the IPTAB, the likelihood that Steelhead’s patent infringement lawsuit based on those patents will be dismissed has increased significantly. This is highly significant in that Samsung Heavy Industries is now able to carry out this massive project, with a total project cost of USD 4 billion, in a stable manner and without litigation risk.

Lee & Ko advised HD Hyundai Oilbank Co., Ltd. on its joint acquisition, together with Tenet Equity Partners Co., Ltd., of all issued shares in Daekyung O&T Co., Ltd. for KRW 470 billion.

Lee & Ko advised on the full transaction process, from the initial review of the transaction structure and related legal issues through negotiations with Tenet and the sellers and execution of the transaction documents. In addition to supporting negotiations between the seller and purchaser, Lee & Ko carefully structured and negotiated the shareholders agreement to balance the interests, rights and obligations of HD Hyundai Oilbank, whose principal objective was a strategic business alliance, and Tenet, whose principal objective was a financial investment. This advice played a key role in bringing the transaction to a successful signing.