[Focus] U.S. lawyer, “Coupang mentions ‘government instructions’ and mobilizes conflict frame between Korea and the U.S.… ‘Dangerous strategy’ has no impact on U.S. lawsuit”

- Compensation plan, for crisis management and customer defection prevention.. has nothing to do with reducing liability in U.S. lawsuits.
- The apology is aimed at domestic public opinion in Korean, and aimed at US investors and courts in English.
- ​English statement, damages limited to ‘Korea’… Intention to reduce Coupang Inc’s responsibility
- Public opinion war will only lead to loss of trust in Coupang...little impact on US court judgment
- ​Coupang claims protection in the U.S. as a ‘small business and target for fostering’
​- Statements made at the hearing will remain as official statements that cannot be overturned in U.S. lawsuits.

■ Broadcast: MBC Radio Standard FM 95.9MHz (07:05~08:30)
■ Host: Kim Jong-bae, current affairs critic
■ Talk: U.S. Attorney Dong-Hoo Son (Representing New York Coupang Class Action Litigation)

◎ Host > Coupang Chairman Kim Beom-seok suddenly issued an apology. Yesterday, a day before the hearing, a so-called ‘compensation plan’ was also presented. There is also an interpretation that this is a move to lessen the legal burden in U.S. lawsuits. We have invited Attorney Son Dong-hoo from Daeryun Law Firm, who is representing us in class action lawsuits in the United States. Let’s talk about it. Welcome.

◎ Son Dong-hoo > Hello.

◎ Host > First of all, I think I should ask about the evaluation of this, but I keep getting caught up in the term ‘compensation plan’. I honestly don’t know if this should be considered compensation, but anyway, they put forward this worth 50,000 won per person. How do you rate it?

◎ Son Dong-hoo > As someone who is involved in the trial, it is difficult for me to evaluate it. Although you mentioned the 50,000 won compensation, from a practical perspective, this part seems to be a part of responding to crisis management to some extent and also a part to prevent customer defection, so it is difficult to see it as any kind of compensation from a legal perspective.

◎ Host > Then won’t the scope be narrowed and the lawsuit proceed?

◎ Son Dong-hoo > That’s right.

◎ Host > As the lawsuit progresses, what impact could this have on the outcome?

◎ Son Dong-hoo > Since I will be litigating in the U.S. federal court, from the perspective of the U.S. court, in fact, I will not see this measure as any compensation or closure of damage recovery, but will view it separately from the determination of legal responsibility.

◎ Host > In America?

◎ Son Dong-hoo > Yes.

◎ Facilitator > Since you have committed certain acts of responsibility, you will be given a reduced sentence. For example, I will not judge you this way. In an American court?

◎ Son Dong-hoo > That’s right.

◎ Host > That’s right. Isn’t there an apology issued by Chairman Kim Beom-seok? Then Coupang’s statement came out. So what impact will it have?

◎ Son Dong-hoo > I also saw the content from both sides. I've seen both the Korean and English versions, so I think you can think of it this way. I think we need to think more about the audience for the statements released by Chairman Kim Beom-seok at Coupang. The Korean version appears to be aimed at our citizens and the National Assembly hearings. And since this part of the English version is actually aimed at investors in the U.S. and U.S. courts, the U.S. statement is more limited and narrowed. range.

◎ Host > The expression is a little different.

◎ Son Dong-hoo > That’s right.

◎ Host > Did you read it that way, lawyer?

◎ Son Dong-hoo > I had to read it as a lawyer rather than emotionally, so I read it with a focus on how it would be read in court. The expression was a little different.

◎ Host > I'm not sure about the exact wording, but in any case, the English version is written with the nuance that the suspicions and measures taking place in Korea are 'based on false facts.'

◎ Son Dong-hoo > In addition, the subject itself was limited to Korea as ‘Coupang Korea’ and ‘Korean People’. In fact, the parent company, Coupang Inc, is an American company, and the English version released in the United States is a statement that was clearly intended to limit the victims to Korea.

◎ Host > Attorney, are you saying that you are emphasizing that ‘this has nothing to do with Coupang Inc’?

◎ Son Dong-hoo > I think it was a statement made to appeal as much as possible to the court that they themselves recognized it that way.

◎ Host > Then, according to American legal principles, is there any room for that to work?

◎ Son Dong-hoo > The statement that they were aware of it at some point, that they knew to some extent, and that the damage was limited to Korea is in line with their persuasive legal logic.

◎ Host > For example, the results of a self-investigation were presented, followed by a statement and an apology. Then, I heard that Coupang's stock price rose by more than 6% on the New York Stock Exchange. How should this be interpreted? It worked. It worked. Should we look at it this way?

◎ Son Dong-hoo > In the short term, the number of 6% is clearly a very large increase, so it can be done, but it does not mean that it has worked, but rather that the actual problem itself has been solved. However, the same is true in Korea, but stock investors and the investment market itself consider the uncertainty of CEOs and companies to be the most risky factor, so when they see that the company is responding to this to some extent, the stock market itself can react stably to this. However, there is a risk factor that the ups and downs can fluctuate significantly depending on the progress of the court trial.

◎ Host > By any chance, Coupang said, ‘This is in accordance with government instructions’ when making the announcement. If you look at the announcement.

◎ Son Dong-hoo > Yes, that’s right.

◎ Host > However, there is a controversy over the authenticity of this in Korea, so I would like to ask you about my interpretation. If the government is brought into this, this will become a government-to-government issue, opening the way for the United States to respond at the government level. Is there room to interpret it this way? What do you think?

◎ Son Dong-hoo > I think that part is related to the content that Robert O’Brien, who was the national security adviser during Trump’s first term, posted on ‘X’. We did not consider this to be Coupang Korea's mistake in leaking damage to the government, and did not specify which government it was by using the word "government." It is a very dangerous strategy to write this part in a statement in such a way that it allows an American company to participate in an investigation by the government in Korea without saying which department did this.

◎ Host > Dangerous strategy? What do you mean by dangerous?

◎ Son Dong-hoo > A high-ranking official in the former administration made a very influential statement, even though it was a personal ‘X’. Such a response will not enter into the legal judgment of the trial at all in court. Instead, the investment market and Korean victims become more anxious. We will lose more trust in Coupang Korea. That's why I think it's a risky strategy.

◎ Host > How should we interpret the phenomenon of statements and claims being made among some American media and some influential figures telling people not to touch Coupang?

◎ Son Dong-hoo > I don’t think I read the part that said, ‘Don’t mess with Coupang.’ In this way, as the Korean government said, we have confirmed that President Trump has expressed in a roundabout way that the intervention of U.S. corporations in this specific case could have negative consequences for making the relationship between Korea and the U.S. more friendly. It is very unfortunate that Coupang is causing this in this way. However, based on the court's decision, it will not have much of an impact on the trial, so I don't think you need to worry about that.

◎ Host > That’s right. But the picture goes like this. When an accident occurred, Coupang conducted a sincere investigation following the instructions of the Korean government, and isn't there some measure that will be taken by the Korean government later? Nevertheless, if the Korean government takes action like this and creates a narrative that says it has harmed Coupang and is oppressing Coupang, isn't there a possibility that it will affect public opinion in the U.S. and that public opinion created in that way may have an impact on lawsuits in the U.S.? What do you think?

◎ Son Dong-hoo > Coupang's parent company is located in Delaware, USA. If you look at the contents disclosed by these companies, the annual report called 10-K, or the lobbying report submitted to the Senate, Coupang's US company is expressed as a very small company, a small and medium-sized company, and as a small company, it is expressed in a way that it must be protected and nurtured. It's a very different strategy from Korea.

◎ Host > Within the United States?

◎ Son Dong-hoo > Yes, that’s right.

◎ Host > Since it is a small and medium-sized business, it is subject to fostering.

◎ Son Dong-hoo > That’s right.

◎ Host > Need to be protected?

◎ Son Dong-hoo > In order to protect the e-commerce platform, I lobby a lot and hire a lot of U.S. citizens, so I am taking a strategy as a corporation to protect it. It's a different strategy from the very aggressive one in Korea.

◎ Host > Are you saying that Coupang is pursuing that strategy in the United States?

◎ Son Dong-hoo > That’s right. Therefore, we do not raise concerns about how American public opinion will change regarding Coupang or whether public opinion will change to the extent that it will affect the trial.

◎ Host > You are saying that over the years, close to 15 billion won has been spent on lobbying funds alone.

◎ Son Dong-hoo > That’s why I studied the Senate lobbying report. There are times when we do it quarterly, but there are times when we do it a lot, sometimes over $1 million or over 1.5 billion won, but as I said, Coupang's business is a small and medium business, and since it is a small and medium-sized business, we need to foster it and foster e-commerce, so we have continued to lobby to protect it and say, "We will develop the local economy in this way," so it is very different from the investment business strategy in Korea.

◎ Host > The reason Chairman Kim Beom-seok gave for not attending the hearing was because Coupang is a global company and has many schedules around the world?

◎ Son Dong-hoo > I also made personal schedules...

◎ Host > In the U.S., they call themselves a small business, but in Korea, they call themselves a global company. I thought it was very different, so I asked.

◎ Son Dong-hoo > I also don’t know why they keep delaying it like this, but I hope you come.

◎ Host > What kind of person do you think Chairman Kim Beom-seok is?

◎ Son Dong-hoo > I also find it inappropriate to directly evaluate people involved in trials and lawsuits. Looking at the governance structure, various statements, and the situation so far, he is a person who has made very aggressive investments and success in Korea, but in addition to lobbying at the U.S. headquarters, I hope that he will also do a lot of good work and donate a lot in Korea. I am part of that.

◎ Host > Do you wish you had donated more instead of saying you donated a lot?

◎ Son Dong-hoo > Yes, I hope you do a lot in Korea as well.

◎ Host > Okay. By the way, has the recruitment of litigants ended and what happens?

◎ Son Dong-hoo > No. Litigators participating in U.S. federal courts can continue to collect plaintiffs even after we file a complaint.

◎ Host > Even after submitting a complaint?

◎ Son Dong-hu > You can continue to attend even afterward. So, unlike Korea, we do not have to continuously attach and submit litigants, so the number is continuing to increase. Please understand that there is a delay due to the fact that we have to appear in federal court to designate a representative plaintiff.

◎ Host > What is the size of the lawsuits filed so far?

◎ Son Dong-hoo > I am not involved in the Korean Coupang lawsuit, so I don't know much about it because I am an American lawyer, but it seems that there are more than thousands of people in the United States alone.

◎ Host > Thousands or more. So when do you plan to submit the complaint?

◎ Son Dong-hoo > As soon as possible, the small intestine is ready. As you said, I continued to contact people in the area until dawn today in terms of being eligible to become a representative plaintiff.

◎ Host > We had an interview with the CEO once before, and he said he would likely submit it within the year, but if it is within the year, it would be by tomorrow.

◎ Son Dong-hoo > I see.

◎ Host > How is it possible to submit a complaint within the year?

◎ Son Dong-hoo > We will do our best to make it possible.

◎ Host > It’s civil affairs now, right? this.

◎ Son Dong-hoo > That’s right.

◎ Host > It takes a long time. A lawsuit?

◎ Son Dong-hoo > The lawsuit itself takes a long time because it is also a federal court.

◎ Host > How much do you expect until the results come out?

◎ Son Dong-hoo > As I said, plaintiffs can continue to participate even after the complaint is submitted. Also, because it is a class action lawsuit, most of the plaintiffs have the same purpose, but there are sporadic cases in many places, so it will take a long time to select a date. After that, the discovery process, which is why we do it in the United States, but this process takes time.

◎ Host > Okay. The hearing will be held for two days starting today. It is highly likely that a government investigation will be conducted afterwards. If you look at the current movements of Korean politics. Can the results of the hearing or the government investigation serve as reference material for litigation in the United States or have an impact on the court's judgment?

◎ Son Dong-hoo > Rather than influencing the judgment, what is important to us is the fixedness of the statement, its veracity, and the inability to overturn what was said or said at the hearing, rather than accepting the same attitude in the court.

◎ Host > This means it will be an official statement.

◎ Son Dong-hoo > That’s right.

◎ Host > Then, the reason why Chairman Kim Beom-seok did not appear at the hearing may have taken that into account. Although this is an area of ​​interpretation.

◎ Son Dong-hoo > I understand that you have made sufficient legal judgment.

◎ Host > That’s it, right?

◎ Son Dong-hoo > Yes.

◎ Host > I think there is plenty of room to interpret it that way. All right. I think this is where we should listen to what the lawyer has to say today. Thank you.

◎ Son Dong-hoo > Thank you.

◎ Host > We were joined by attorney Son Dong-hoo of Daeryun Law Firm.

[When quoting the content, please indicate that this is an interview with MBC .]

[View full article]
[Focus] US lawyer "Coupang mentions 'government instructions' and mobilizes conflict frame between Korea and US... 'dangerous strategy' has no impact on US lawsuit" (Shortcut)