[Meet the Law Firm] Lee Jun-ki, CEO of Pacific Ocean, “For companies, a prolonged investigation is itself a punishment.”

“For a company, a prolonged investigation is itself a punishment. Even if the investigation and prosecution agencies are separated, the process of resolving the case should not be cut off.”

Representative Lee Jun-ki (60, 22nd class of the Judicial Research and Training Institute), who met at the Centropolis Law Firm Pacific office in Jongno-gu, Seoul on the 29th of last month, said this, citing the Fair Trade Commission complaint case as an area that requires a particularly careful response in the process of establishing a new criminal justice system.

Representative Lee emphasized that in cases of collusion or unfair support, high-level legal and economic judgments, such as market delimitation and the effect of restricting competition, determine the conclusion, and that the Serious Crimes Investigation Office (SCA) needs 'personnel with skilled investigative experience' as it is necessary to understand the uniqueness and physiology of corporate crime.

Representative Lee added, “If there is no experience, the investigation may be prolonged and the conclusion may be shaky, and the Public Prosecution Office only has the authority to request a supplementary investigation, so the case may be delayed as it goes back and forth between the two agencies.” He added, “For a company, a prolonged investigation is itself a sanction and punishment.”

In particular, he said, “If the Central Investigation Office and the Public Prosecution Office do not stand on the same legal principles from the beginning, the Fair Trade Commission complaint case will drift,” and “There is a need for a process of mutual consultation from the beginning of the investigation, and the accused must be guaranteed a sufficient opportunity to make a defense at the Public Prosecution Office.”

At the same time, the Central Investigation Agency proposed a plan to actively recruit lawyers in the field of fair trade and appoint experts in competition law and market analysis to the Investigation Review Committee, which reviews the appropriateness of the investigation.

CEO Lee Joon-gi also cited the gap in the ‘criminal leniency’ (voluntary reporter exemption system) as an urgent task.

The leniency system has been divided into the Fair Trade Commission's leniency, which reduces administrative sanctions such as the imposition of fines, and the criminal leniency, where the prosecution does not indict or reduce the sentence.

Criminal leniency has been applied based on the Supreme Prosecutors' Office regulations, not laws, and it has not been decided who will operate it and on what basis in the process of separating investigative and prosecution powers.

Representative Lee said, “The Central Investigation Office, which does not have the right to prosecute, cannot promise immunity, and the legal basis for the Public Prosecution Office to have that authority has not yet been established.” He added, “There is a need to clearly state what the dual leniency structure will be and who has the authority to decide on reductions.”

Meanwhile, as the scale of the investigation of Fair Trade Commission complaints increases, CEO Lee predicted that law firms' responses will shift from 'defense after the incident' to 'prevention before the incident'.

Furthermore, he emphasized, “As the institutions and procedures at each response stage, such as the Fair Trade Commission, the Heavy Water and Fisheries Service, the Public Prosecution Service, and the court, are different, we must respond optimally for each stage, but we must integrate and design everything as one team from the beginning.”

In this regard, Pacific announced that it has launched and is operating the Fair Trade Criminal Response Center, where experts in each field collaborate, in addition to the Law and Economics Center, which provides advice using economic analysis techniques.

Representative Lee emphasized that technology leak incidents also require a different response strategy than in the past.

In technology leak cases, the main changes were that the leak routes have diversified compared to the past, the target of the leak has moved from drawings to people, and it has become an issue of competition between countries and economic security.

Representative Lee explained, "In the past, 'abnormal and secret takeover' was the focus, but now there are increasing cases of core technology being taken away while technology is transferred and shared within seemingly normal transactions such as joint ventures, overseas research centers, and equity investments."

What all changes have in common is that they are difficult to deal with through ex post criminal punishment alone.

Representative Lee said, "Technology leaked from overseas bases is difficult to investigate, the movement of people is a matter of contracts and compensation, not punishment, and technology leakage carries with it the risk of regulatory violations. It has become essential to establish a systematic and organic technology management system in advance."

Representative Lee emphasized that each company's response should also be "moved from ex post to proactive and the location from the security department to the site of contracts and transactions."

He pointed out that as a company, we must first start by defining and classifying ‘what our core technology is,’ and that the focus of management must also shift from ‘documents’ to ‘people and contracts.’

Furthermore, he added that there is a need to prepare evidence so that it can be used immediately, saying, “As soon as a leak is suspected, we must be able to immediately preserve records and devices and initiate preliminary injunctions and criminal charges.”

In the case of criminal response, he emphasized that the investigative agencies were divided into not only the police industrial technology security investigation unit, but also the Central Investigation Agency and the Intellectual Property Office's special judicial police, and defense to the public prosecution office, which decides on prosecution, has also become important.

He said, “Selecting an organization and procedure that will effectively determine the facts is a strategy, and multifaceted advice from a law firm that understands technology and knows the field has become more important. This is also why Pacific handles technology leak cases as a ‘one team’ of intellectual property rights, detectives, and forensics.”

When asked about the changes that generative artificial intelligence (AI) has brought to the legal market, CEO Lee Jun-ki replied, “It has broken down the barrier between clients and experts.”

He explained, “These days, clients first review cases with AI and then come to the law firm. The gap between information and knowledge has narrowed,” adding, “In the end, what remains in large law firms is not information, but advanced judgment and execution.”

Regarding changes in law firm hiring due to the use of AI, he said, "In areas where simple research is the center of work, demand for new employees may decrease, but in areas where high level judgment is centered, such as complex advice and disputes, AI augments people, expanding the range of work that one person can do, and demand may be maintained or even increased."

Ultimately, it is predicted that changes will be required in the way law firms develop human resources.

CEO Lee said, “Until now, low-level employees have learned to make judgments by looking over their shoulders while doing basic research and organizing documents for several years, but when that basic work is reduced to AI, the path to learn judgments disappears.”

In the future, we believe that it is necessary to intentionally develop judgment skills through training and structured educational materials to ask and answer ‘why that conclusion was reached.’

Furthermore, he said, “At Pacific, we are advancing the participation of junior lawyers in customer contact and strategy meetings so that they can experience advanced judgment and execution early on.”

Pacific Law Firm is a law firm established in 1980 and is comprised of approximately 950 experts, including domestic and foreign lawyers and certified public accountants. Based on expertise in major fields such as corporate law, mergers and acquisitions (M&A), finance, fair trade, taxation, and intellectual property rights, we have handled transactions and disputes involving complex legal and regulatory issues.

He has accumulated achievements in large-scale and long-term projects, including winning successive cases in the Lone Star-Schindler International Investment Dispute (ISDS) on behalf of the Korean government through collaboration with experts in fields such as international arbitration, finance, taxation, and fair trade.