ANTITRUST PRACTICE - Yulchon

10113. Abuse of Market Dominance continued• In 2006, we represented Daum Communications and RealNetworks in a case againstMicrosoft, which was charged with abusing its market dominant position in the onlinemessenger and streaming media markets. We assisted our clients in reaching asettlement in which Microsoft agreed to provide economic benefits worth USD 30million and USD 760 million to Daum Communications and Real Networks,respectively. We also represented the KFTC in a motion filed by Microsoft with theSeoul High Court for suspension of enforcement and prevailed (The case did notproceed further since Microsoft dropped the litigation).• In 2003, we represented LG Card in a case where Hyundai Capital, Samsung Capital,and our client were charged with harming consumer benefits by charging highcommissions for installment financing. Our client was cleared of all charges.• In 2001, we represented Hyundai Hysco in a case where POSCO was charged withabusing its market dominant position. We also advised the KFTC in issuing acorrective measure on POSCO for its violations.4. Unfair Trade PracticesA. Unfair Solicitation of Customers• During the period from 2007 to 2009, we represented many pharmaceuticalcompanies (domestic as well as multinational) in cases where those companies werecharged with engaging in unfair solicitation of customers by providing economicbenefits to healthcare professionals of medical institutions in return for prescriptionsfor their medical products. We assisted our clients from the investigation stage to theplenary session of the KFTC and obtained substantial reductions in fines.• In 2002, we successfully defended Hyundai Motor Company and Kia MotorsCorporation before the KFTC (obtaining a surcharge reduction of 30%) againstallegations that they provided favorable rates on auto-installment paymentagreements to their affiliated companies. We won on appeal to the Seoul High Court,which was upheld by the Supreme Court.• In 2001, we represented SK Telecom in a case involving discriminatory treatment ofits subsidiary, SK Global. We assisted our client from the investigation stage to theplenary session of the KFTC and obtained reductions of most of the surcharges. Wewon on appeal in the administrative case filed with the Seoul High Court and theSupreme Court (2004).C. Abuse of Superior Trading Position• In 2011, we represented SM entertainment, Korea’s largest multimedia entertainmentcompany, in a case where it was charged with abusing its superior trading position inmaking unfair exclusive contracts with its entertainers and trainees. We assisted ourclient in the KFTC proceeding and successfully obtained a substantial reduction in thescope of the KFTC’s corrective order.• In 2008, we represented Korea Infoservice in a case where it was charged with abuseof its superior trading position due to its termination of contracts with its sales agentsbefore the contracts’ terms expired. We assisted our client from the investigationstage to the plenary session of the KFTC and obtained a dismissal for our client.• In 2006, our successful defense of Hyundai IPark Mall resulted in the KFTC’s decisionto end its investigation into the allegation that Hyundai IPark Mall was abusing itssuperior trading position vis-a-vis its advertising agency.• In 2004 and 2005, we provided legal advice to Samchully Co., Ltd., the largest citygas provider in Korea. We assisted our client and obtained the KFTC’s decision notto initiate the examination process and a dismissal for the company.B. Unlawful Discriminatory Practices• In 2008, we successfully defended Daum Communications Corp. against allegationsthat it provided free advertisements to its affiliates, thereby discriminating againstother advertisers. We assisted our client from the investigation stage to the plenarysession of the KFTC and obtained a dismissal for Daum.• In 2006, we successfully defended Woori Bank against allegations that it unlawfullydiscriminated in favor of its affiliates by allowing them to charge a higher commissionthan non-affiliates. We obtained a dismissal at the investigation stage of the KFTC.D. Unfair Refusal to Deal• In 2011, we represented Baxter, a multinational pharmaceutical company, in a casewhere Hanall Biopharma submitted a complaint to the KFTC accusing Baxter ofunfairly refusing to deal (which involved negotiations between Baxter and Hanall topreserve Hanall’s status as the exclusive dealer of certain Baxter medical products)and unfairly soliciting customers. We assisted our client in the KFTC investigationstage and obtained a dismissal of all charges.• In 2003, we represented Daum Communications Corp. during the KFTC’sinvestigation into alleged unfair discrimination in anti-spam measures. We assistedour client and obtained a dismissal at the investigation stage of the KFTC.