Member Vetting Process
Log In
About
Members
News
Awards
Contact
Member Vetting Process
Log In
Log In
Member Search
Specialism
Law Firm
Advisory Firm
Country
Afghanistan
Albania
Algeria
Angola
Anguilla
Antigua and Barbuda
Argentina
Armenia
Aruba
Australia
Austria
Azerbaijan
Bahamas
Bahrain
Bangladesh
Barbados
Belgium
Belize
Bermuda
Bolivia
Bosnia and Herzegovina
Botswana
Brazil
British Virgin Islands
Bulgaria
Cameroon
Canada
Cayman Islands
Chile
China
Colombia
Congo (Dem. Rep.)
Costa Rica
Croatia
Cyprus
Czech Republic
Denmark
Djibouti
Dominican Republic
Egypt
El Salvador
Estonia
Finland
France
Germany
Ghana
Gibraltar
Greece
Guatemala
Hong Kong
Hungary
Iceland
India
Indonesia
Iran
Israel
Italy
Jamaica
Japan
Jersey
Kenya
Korea (South)
Kosovo
Kuwait
Lebanon
Liechtenstein
Luxembourg
Macau
Macedonia
Madagascar
Malaysia
Malta
Mauritania
Mauritius
Mexico
Monaco
Morocco
Netherlands
New Zealand
Nicaragua
Nigeria
Norway
Pakistan
Panama
Paraguay
Peru
Philippines
Poland
Portugal
Puerto Rico
Qatar
Republic of Ireland
Romania
Russia
Saint Kitts and Nevis
Saint Lucia
Saudi Arabia
Senegal
Serbia
Seychelles
Singapore
Slovakia
Slovenia
South Africa
Spain
Sri Lanka
Sweden
Switzerland
Taiwan
Tanzania
Thailand
Togo
Trinidad and Tobago
Tunisia
Turkey
Turks and Caicos Islands
UAE
Uganda
UK
Ukraine
Uruguay
USA
Vietnam
Zimbabwe
Practice Area
Abuse of Dominance
Accountancy
Accounting and Tax
Acquisition Finance
Administrative
Admiralty
Agribusiness
AI
Alternative Asset Management
Alternative Dispute Resolution
Alternative Finance
Arbitration
Art
Asset Protection
Asset Protection Structures
Audit & Assurance
Audit & Finance
Audit and Accounting Services
Audit and Administration
Aviation
Banking & Finance
Banking Litigation
Bankruptcy
Broker Risk Management
Business
Business Formation
Business Immigration
Capital Markets
Citizenship
Citizenship by Descent
Civil
Civil Litigation
Civil Rights
Commercial
Commercial Arbitration
Commercial Contracts
Commercial Leasing
Commercial Litigation
Commercial Litigation
Commercial Property
Commercial Real Estate
Commercial Tenancy
Commodities Trading
Commodity Disputes
Company
Company & Fund Administration
Company Formation
Competition
Compliance
Compliance & Regulatory
Construction
Contentious Probate
Contract
Contractual Disputes
Copyright
Corporate
Corporate Accountant & VAT
Corporate Criminal
Corporate Finance
Corporate Governance
Corporate Immigration
Corporate Investment
Corporate Restructuring
Corporate Risk Management
Corporate Services
Corporate Support Services
Corporate Tax
Costs
Criminal
Criminal Defence
Criminal Fraud
Cross Border Estates
Cross-Border
Cross-Border M&A
Cross-Border Transactions
Cultural Property
Customs Advisory
Data & Innovation
Data Privacy
Data Protection
Debt Collection
Debt Recovery
Defence & Security Procurement
Digital Transformation Consultancy
Dispute Resolution
Divorce
Domestic & International Tax
Due Diligence
Economic Criminal
Employee Benefits
Employment
Employment Litigation
Energy
Energy & Natural Resources
Environmental
ERISA & Employment Benefits
Estate Planning
European
Expert Witness Property Valuation
Family
Fiduciary
Financial Services
Financial Services & Regulatory
Financial Transactions
FinTech
Fiscal
Foreign Direct Investments
Foreign Investments
Franchise
Fraud
Full Service
Fund Administration
Gaming
Health & Safety
Healthcare
Healthcare M&A
Hedge Funds
Human Rights & Labour Rights
Immigration
India Desk
Industrial Relations
Information Technology
Infrastructure
Inheritance
Insolvency
Insurance
Insurance & Reinsurance
Insurance Litigation
Intellectual Property
International Arbitration
International Business
International Corporate
International Debt Collection
International Dispute Resolution
International Employment
International Franchise
International Fraud
International Litigation
International Private
International Real Estate
International Succession
International Tax
International Tax Planning
International Trade
International Trade & National Security
Investigations
Investment
IP Litigation
IT
IT Services
Joint Ventures
Labour & Employment
Leasehold Enfranchisement
Legal Malpractice
Legal Risk Management
Life Science Patent
Life Sciences
Litigation
Litigation & Arbitration
M&A
Maritime
Maritime Arbitration
Matrimonial
Media & Entertainment
Mediation
Mediation & Arbitration
Medical Malpractice
Mining
Neuroradiology Expert Witness
New Technologies
Oil & Gas
Orthopaedic Expert Witness
Patent Litigation
Patent Prosecution
Patents
Payroll Accounting
Personal Injury
Personal Injury - Plaintiff
Pharmaceutical Sector Patents
Pharmaceuticals & Life Sciences
Private Client
Private Equity
Private Funds
Probate & Inheritance
Products
Project
Project Finance
Property Valuation
Public Procurement
Real Estate
Real Estate - Property
Regulatory
Regulatory & Compliance
Renewable Energy
Restructuring
SaaS/PaaS
Securities
Securities Litigation
Shipping & Admiralty
Shipping & Maritime
Sports
Start Up
Succession
Tax
Tax Litigation
Tax Planning
Tax Relocation
Tax Services
Tax Structures
Technology
Telecommunications
TMT
Trademark
Transaction
Transfer Pricing
Transportation
Trust & Estates
Trust Administration
Venture Capital
Wealth & Estate Planning
Wealth Management
Wealth Planning
Whistleblower
White Collar Crime
Wills, Trusts & Estate Planning
Workers Compensation
Workplace Law & Investigations
Follow-Up Article: Implications for Foreign Investors and Joint Venture Partners in Korea
Published: Thursday, July 17, 2025
The Korean Supreme Court’s decision to uphold a voting rights agreement between shareholders is more than a domestic legal clarification—it is a signal to foreign investors and joint venture partners that Korea is taking shareholder agreements seriously.
Historically, enforcement of private shareholder agreements in Korea has been unpredictable. While such agreements were respected in principle, courts were cautious about allowing contracts to override provisions in a company’s articles. This case shifts that balance.
Foreign investors often seek joint ventures to enter the Korean market, particularly in regulated or strategically sensitive sectors. In such partnerships, governance rights and board representation are key to managing risk and preserving influence. This decision gives those rights greater legal weight.
It also provides comfort that Korean courts will back minority shareholders if they are unfairly overridden by a local partner. This has often been a concern, especially where one party holds a slight majority and seeks to dominate the board or change agreed terms.
The ability to secure indirect enforcement is equally important. Fines for non-compliance send a message that agreements will not be ignored without consequence. This brings Korean practice more in line with international norms and adds predictability to what can be a complex business environment.
There are still practical considerations. Investors must ensure that agreements are well-drafted, clear, and balanced. Korean courts are unlikely to enforce vague or overreaching clauses. The underlying principle remains: mutual agreement and reasonable expectations are essential.
Due diligence also matters. Before entering a joint venture, parties should assess not just the financials but also the governance culture of their prospective partner. Cultural misunderstandings can quickly lead to disputes if expectations are not aligned.
This ruling may also influence how shareholders structure their agreements. More foreign investors may now look to include voting rights provisions as a core feature, not just a side agreement. Korean partners may also take such commitments more seriously knowing the courts will enforce them.
Finally, this case is part of a broader trend. Korea continues to globalise its economy and align its corporate governance standards with international best practice. Courts are becoming more commercially aware and willing to enforce fair, negotiated agreements.
For those doing business in Korea, this is a welcome development. It strengthens confidence in the rule of law and helps reduce the risk of minority shareholder abuse. With good advice and clear drafting, foreign investors can enter Korean joint ventures with greater assurance that their rights will be respected—and enforced.
Share on Facebook
Share on Twitter
Share on LinkedIn
Mark Benton
Ahnse Law Offices
Country:
Korea (South)
Practice Area:
Corporate
Website:
www.ahnse.com
Phone Number:
02-743-0400
Email:
marktbenton@ahnse.com
Fax:
02-762-2900
Education University of Birmingham, England (LL.B) Anglia Ruskin University, England (LL.M) Profesional Experience rhw Solicitors, (2005-2007) (Associate) Abrahams Dresden Solicitors, London EC1 (1998-2004) (Partner) Financial Services Compensation Scheme (1996-1998) Sumitomo Banking Corporation (1996-1997) The Firm Ahnse is a full service international law firm which has been providing quality legal services to domestic and international clients since 2003. With lawyers qualified in Korea and foreign jurisdictions, Ahnse is a law firm with a broad skill set. Importantly, we are able to see both sides of the cultural equation in an international transaction giving us greater insight and enabling us to achieve the desired results for our clients. The word ‘Ahnse’ derives from a Chinese character the translation of which approximates to “peaceful world “, which means sharing the burden with our clients and quietly and diligently finding the appropriate legal and commercial solution in a creative and efficient manne
View Profile
Member Introduction
Albert Sidney Golbert
Golbert & Associates
California, USA
View Profile
Stevan J. Pardo
Pardo Jackson Gainsburg & Shelowitz, PL
Florida, USA
View Profile
Stephen Vlock
Vlock & Associates, P.C.
New York, USA
View Profile
Ruben Flores
FGA Attorneys & Advisors
Texas, USA
View Profile
The Lawyer Network in numbers
0
+
Members Firms
0
+
Countries
0
+
Practice Areas
0
+
Member Firms
Total Staff