SEUM's attorneys, Hoseok Jung and Geon-uk Shim, have contributed an article to the September issue (No. 121) of 'BFL (Business, Finance & Law),' a specialized legal journal on business and finance published by the Center for Financial Law (CFL) at Seoul National University. The article focuses on "Major Types of Disputes among Startup Shareholders and Legal Issues."

CFL, an affiliated research institution under the Graduate School of Law at Seoul National University, is dedicated to conducting objective, continuous, systematic, and in-depth research on major legal challenges faced by the financial market. Its goal is to contribute to the advancement of the legal infrastructure supporting the financial market. In addition to the regular publication of BFL, CFL engages in various activities, including forums on corporate law and capital markets research, fostering exchanges of opinions among scholars, policymakers, and practitioners to form reasonable consensus (Link).

"BFL" is a specialized legal journal focusing on business and finance, published six times a year on a bimonthly basis. Each issue features in-depth analyses by experts from academia, the legal community, and the financial sector on selected specific topics. The content includes legal discussions, roundtable talks, case studies, serials, and international trends.

The September issue of BFL is dedicated to the theme of "Legal Issues in Startups," and attorneys Hoseok Jung and Geon-uk Shim from SEUM contributed to the special feature. They delved into key contractual issues in startup disputes, including "Founders' Agreement on Share Return," "Liquidation Preference in Property Distribution Priority," and "Validity of Key Obligations and Sanction Clauses in Investment Agreements."

Attorneys Hoseok Jung and Geon-uk Shim specifically emphasized the renewed attention on the validity of various rights commonly included in investment agreements since the Supreme Court's ruling on July 13, 2023. The ruling explicitly stated that agreements granting investors veto power, justifying disparate treatment of certain shareholders under special circumstances, may be valid if there are specific justifiable reasons. This has brought a fresh focus on the validity of various rights commonly included in investment agreements.

*This article (September issue of BFL) is available for free viewing by CFL members and will be publicly accessible on the website one year after the publication date.