Corporate Governance Lawyer | Board structure, shareholder relations, and compliance in one framework
Summary
Corporate governance advisory covers how a company's board, shareholders, and management interact within the boundaries set by the Commercial Code and, for listed companies, capital markets regulation. Disputes in this area rarely start as lawsuits — they begin as ambiguous board resolutions, informal related-party deals, or a founder-investor disagreement that was never documented properly. A governance review typically looks at director duties, shareholder agreements, related-party transaction approval, and whether the company's internal control system can actually catch problems before they become litigation (상법 제382조의3, 상법 제542조의8).
Administrative · CorporateGoverning law: Commercial Act (상법)Governing law: Financial Investment Services and Capital Markets Act (자본시장법)Board & Shareholder Advisory
Corporate Governance | Director Duties and Board Resolution Risk
Most governance disputes trace back to a board resolution that was passed without proper process, or a director who acted outside the scope the board actually authorized.
Duty of care and loyalty
Directors owe the company a duty to perform their duties faithfully in accordance with statute and the articles of incorporation, and a duty of loyalty not to pursue personal interests that conflict with the company's (상법 제382조의3, 상법 제382조의4). Breach can expose a director to liability toward the company for resulting damages (상법 제399조). In practice, the hardest question is not whether a decision turned out badly, but whether the director followed a reasonable process in reaching it — this is where the business judgment framework matters.
Board resolution requirements
Certain matters — approval of related-party transactions, issuance of new shares within board authority, appointment of representative directors — require a valid board resolution under the Commercial Act and the company's articles. A resolution passed without proper notice to all directors, or without the quorum required by the articles, can later be challenged as void, which puts every transaction built on top of it at risk (상법 제391조).
Outside director and audit committee obligations
Listed companies above certain asset thresholds must appoint outside directors and, in many cases, an audit committee (상법 제542조의8, 상법 제542조의11). Advisory work here often focuses on whether the outside director's independence requirements are actually met, since a defective appointment can cascade into challenges against decisions the board made relying on that director's presence.
Corporate Governance | Shareholder Rights and Minority Protection
Founder-investor relationships and family-owned company successions generate a recurring pattern: a minority shareholder who feels shut out of information or decision-making, and a majority who believes they are simply running the business.
Right to inspect and shareholder meeting rights
Shareholders holding a minimum percentage of shares can request inspection of accounting books and records, and can demand convocation of a shareholders' meeting if the board fails to call one (상법 제466조, 상법 제366조). These rights are frequently the first legal lever used when a minority shareholder suspects mismanagement but does not yet have enough evidence to file a derivative suit.
Derivative suits and director liability
A shareholder meeting the statutory holding requirement can demand that the company sue a director for breach of duty, and file a derivative suit on the company's behalf if the company does not act within 30 days (상법 제403조). These cases turn heavily on documentary evidence — board minutes, internal approval records — which is why governance advisory often includes a records-hygiene review before any dispute arises.
Shareholder agreements and drag/tag rights
For venture-backed companies, the shareholder agreement (not the articles of incorporation) usually contains the actual mechanics of exit — tag-along, drag-along, liquidation preference, anti-dilution. Contract interpretation disputes here are common precisely because these clauses are negotiated once at investment and rarely revisited until an exit event forces the question.
Corporate Governance | Related-Party Transactions and Conflicts of Interest
Transactions between a company and its directors, controlling shareholders, or affiliates are not prohibited outright, but they are subject to approval requirements precisely because of the conflict-of-interest risk.
Self-dealing approval requirement
A director (or a controlling shareholder in listed companies) who wants to transact with the company must obtain prior board approval disclosing the material terms, and the transaction must be fair in its content and procedure (상법 제398조). A transaction approved without proper disclosure, or approved by a board that included the interested director in the quorum, is vulnerable to being unwound or forming the basis of a damages claim.
Large-scale related-party transactions in listed companies
Listed companies must, above certain transaction-size thresholds, obtain board approval and in some cases report to or seek approval from the shareholders' meeting before entering into a transaction with a major shareholder or specially related person (상법 제542조의9). This is one of the more frequently overlooked compliance points for companies that grow quickly and start dealing more with affiliates without updating internal approval workflows.
Corporate Governance | Internal Control Systems and Compliance Programs
Regulators and courts increasingly ask not just whether something went wrong, but whether the company had a system in place that could have caught it — this is where internal control design becomes a governance issue rather than a purely compliance one.
Internal control standards for large companies
Companies meeting certain size thresholds are required to establish and operate an internal control standard and to appoint a compliance officer responsible for monitoring compliance with that standard (상법 제542조의13). Whether this system exists only on paper or is actually followed becomes directly relevant if a director later argues they exercised reasonable business judgment relying on internal reporting.
Documentation as a defense, not just a formality
In practice, a well-kept set of board minutes, related-party approval records, and internal policy documents is often the single most useful asset a director or company has when a governance dispute or regulatory inquiry arises later. Advisory engagements frequently start with a documentation audit precisely because gaps here are what turn an otherwise defensible decision into a liability exposure.
Corporate Governance | From Initial Review to Ongoing Governance Support
1
Initial governance diagnostic We review the articles of incorporation, board composition, recent board minutes, and any shareholder agreements to identify where the current structure diverges from statutory requirements or from what the company actually intends.
2
Issue-specific legal opinion For a specific transaction or dispute — a related-party deal, a contested board resolution, a shareholder demand — we provide a written opinion on the legal risk and the options available before the company commits to a course of action.
3
Structural remediation Where gaps are found, we help draft or revise board resolutions, approval workflows, shareholder agreement amendments, or internal control policies so the company's actual practice matches what the law and its own governing documents require.
4
Dispute representation, if needed If a disagreement escalates into a formal shareholder demand, derivative suit, or regulatory inquiry, the same team that handled the advisory work represents the company or the individual director through the dispute.
5
Ongoing advisory retainer Many companies keep governance counsel on a standing basis so that new transactions — financing rounds, M&A, affiliate deals — get a governance-compliance check before signing rather than after a problem surfaces.
Corporate Governance | How Fees Are Set for Governance Advisory
One-time diagnostic review Fees for a governance health check (articles, board minutes, shareholder agreements) are generally set based on the number of documents reviewed and company size, and quoted after an initial scoping call.
Transaction-specific opinion A written legal opinion on a specific board resolution or related-party transaction is typically billed based on the complexity of the transaction and the turnaround time required.
Monthly advisory retainer Ongoing governance counsel is often structured as a monthly retainer covering a set scope of recurring questions, with matters outside that scope billed separately.
Dispute representation If a matter escalates to a derivative suit, injunction, or regulatory proceeding, fees follow standard litigation fee structures (retainer plus possible success fee), discussed separately from the advisory fee.
※ Costs vary depending on case complexity and specific circumstances; exact fees will be provided during consultation. No specific outcome is guaranteed.
Corporate Governance | Self-Check Before Your Consultation
1️⃣ For Founders and Management
Does your board actually meet and record minutes, or are resolutions signed after the fact?
Have you obtained board approval before any transaction between the company and a director or major shareholder?
Do your articles of incorporation still match how the company is actually being run?
Is there a shareholder agreement, and does it match what investors believe they agreed to?
2️⃣ For Minority Shareholders and Investors
Have you requested to inspect the company's accounting books, and did the company respond within a reasonable time?
Do you hold the minimum shareholding percentage required to demand a shareholders' meeting or file a derivative suit?
Is there a specific board decision you believe breached a director's duty, and do you have documentary evidence of it?
Does your shareholder agreement give you tag-along, information, or veto rights that the company is not honoring?
3️⃣ For Companies Approaching Listing or Investment
Does your board composition meet outside director and audit committee requirements for your company's size?
Have all related-party transactions in the past two years been properly approved and disclosed?
Is there a written internal control standard, or does compliance depend entirely on informal practice?
Would your current board minutes and approval records withstand due diligence scrutiny?
Frequently Asked Questions
Q. What counts as a related-party transaction that needs board approval?
A. Any transaction between the company and one of its directors, or between the company and its controlling shareholder in the case of listed companies, generally requires prior board approval with disclosure of material terms (상법 제398조). This includes loans, sales of assets, service agreements, and guarantees — not just obviously self-serving deals.
Q. Can a shareholder agreement override the articles of incorporation?
A. No — the articles of incorporation govern the company itself and bind all shareholders, while a shareholder agreement is a private contract that binds only its signatories. Where the two conflict, provisions inconsistent with the articles or the Commercial Act may not be enforceable against the company, which is why key economic terms are often also reflected in the articles.
Q. How many shares do I need to hold to demand an inspection of company books?
A. Under the Commercial Act, shareholders holding at least 3% of total issued shares can request inspection of accounting books and related records (상법 제466조). Listed companies have separate, generally lower thresholds under the Commercial Act's special provisions for listed companies, so the applicable percentage depends on whether the company is listed.
Q. What happens if a board resolution was passed without proper notice to all directors?
A. A board resolution adopted without giving all directors reasonable notice of the meeting can be challenged as invalid, and any subsequent action taken based on that resolution may be exposed to being unwound (상법 제391조). This is one of the most common technical defects raised in governance disputes precisely because notice requirements are easy to overlook in fast-moving companies.
Q. Do outside director requirements apply to our company?
A. Outside director and audit committee requirements under the Commercial Act generally apply to listed companies above certain asset-size thresholds, with more stringent requirements as the company grows (상법 제542조의8). Companies approaching an IPO should review this well before listing, since board composition changes can take time to implement properly.
Q. What is a derivative suit and when can a shareholder file one?
A. A derivative suit lets a shareholder sue a director on the company's behalf for damages caused by a breach of duty, used when the company itself declines to pursue the claim. A shareholder must first demand that the company file suit, and can bring the derivative action directly if the company does not act within 30 days (상법 제403조).
Q. Can a director be held personally liable for a bad business decision?
A. Not automatically — directors are generally protected if they made a reasonably informed decision in good faith and without a conflict of interest, which is often referred to as the business judgment rule in practice. Liability under the Commercial Act typically attaches when the decision-making process itself was deficient — no real deliberation, ignored red flags, or an undisclosed conflict of interest (상법 제399조).
Q. What is an internal control standard and does our company need one?
A. An internal control standard is a set of internal policies and reporting lines meant to prevent and detect legal violations within the company, and certain large companies are statutorily required to adopt one along with a compliance officer (상법 제542조의13). Even companies below the statutory threshold often adopt a lighter version voluntarily, since investors and auditors increasingly ask about it during due diligence.
Q. How is a related-party transaction dispute usually resolved — litigation or negotiation?
A. Many related-party transaction concerns are resolved through internal governance remedies first — board review, revised approval, or a negotiated unwind — before escalating to litigation. Whether litigation becomes necessary usually depends on whether the parties can agree on the transaction's fairness and whether documentary evidence supports one side's position clearly enough to make a quick resolution likely.
Q. Does a foreign parent company need to worry about Korean governance rules for its Korean subsidiary?
A. Yes — a Korean subsidiary is governed by the Commercial Act regardless of who its shareholders are, so board procedure, related-party transaction approval, and director duties all apply the same way as for a domestic company. This is a common blind spot for foreign-owned subsidiaries where headquarters approval is treated as sufficient without a corresponding Korean board resolution.
법무법인 프런티어(이하 “사무소”)는 개인정보보호법에 따라 정보주체의 개인정보 및 권익을 보호하고 개인정보와 관련된 정보주체의 고충을 신속하고 원활하게 처리하기 위하여 본 개인정보 처리방침을 수립·공개합니다.
제 1 조 수집하는 개인정보의 항목, 목적, 방법
제 2 조 개인정보의 처리 및 보유기간
제 3 조 개인정보의 제3자 제공
제 4 조 개인정보 처리업무의 위탁
제 5 조 정보주체의 권리·의무 및 그 행사방법
제 6 조 개인정보의 파기
제 7 조 의견수렴 및 불만처리
제 8 조 개인정보 처리방침의 변경
제 9 조 개인정보의 안전성 확보 조치
제 1 조 (수집하는 개인정보의 항목, 목적, 방법)
① 게시판 글 작성 시 필수 항목에 대한 수집목적은 ‘별도의 구체적 상담을 위하여’이며 수집항목은 ‘이름, 이메일, 연락처’입니다.
② 전항 외에 고객의 서비스 이용 과정이나 요청 사항 처리 과정에서 ‘IP주소, 접속로그, 단말기 및 환경정보, 서비스 이용기록, 쿠키’와 같은 정보들이 자동으로 수집 및 저장될 수 있으며, 이 때의 수집목적은 ‘사용자 홈페이지 이용, 사이트 이용에 대한 문의 민원 등 고객 고충 처리’입니다.
③ 사무소는 ‘홈페이지 고객 문의/고충 처리 시 전화 또는 인터넷을 통한 상담’과 같은 방법으로 개인정보를 수집합니다
제 2 조 (개인정보의 처리 및 보유기간)
관계법령의 규정에 따라 개인정보를 보존하여야 하는 의무가 있는 경우가 아닌 한, 정보주체의 개인정보는 원칙적으로 해당 개인정보의 처리목적이 달성될 때까지 보유 및 이용되며, 그 목적이 달성되면 지체 없이 파기됩니다.
제 3 조 (개인정보의 제3자 제공)
사무소는 정보주체의 개인정보를 본 처리방침에서 명시한 목적에 한해서만 처리하며 정보주체의 사전동의가 있는 경우 또는 개인정보보호법 등 관계법령의 규정에 의거한 경우에만 개인정보를 제3자에게 제공합니다. 사무소는 현재 개인정보를 제3자에게 제공하지 않고 있습니다.
제 4 조 (개인정보 처리업무의 위탁)
사무소는 현재 귀하의 개인정보 보호를 위해 귀하의 개인정보를 직접 취급 관리하고 있습니다. 단, 향후 보다 전문적인 서비스를 제공하기 위하여 제3의 전문기관에 귀하의 정보를 위탁할 필요가 있다고 판단되는 경우, 귀하의 사전 동의 하에 개인정보에 대한 취급을 위탁할 수 있습니다.
제 5 조 (정보주체의 권리·의무 및 그 행사방법)
① 정보주체는 개인정보보호법 등 관계법령이 정하는 바에 따라 사무소에 대해 개인정보의 열람, 정정 및 삭제, 처리정지 요구 등 개인정보 보호 관련 권리를 행사할 수 있습니다.
② 제1항에 따른 권리행사는 정보주체의 법정대리인이나 위임을 받은 사람을 통해서도 할 수 있습니다. 다만, 이 경우에는 개인정보보호법 시행규칙에 따른 위임장을 사무소에 제출하여야 합니다.
③ 사무소는 정보주체의 권리행사에 대하여 개인정보보호법 등 관계법령이 정하는 바에 따라 지체 없이 조치하겠습니다.
제 6 조 (개인정보의 파기)
① 사무소는 원칙적으로 개인정보의 처리목적이 달성된 경우 등 그 개인정보가 불필요하게 되었을 때에는 지체 없이 해당 개인정보를 파기합니다.
② 사무소가 관계법령의 규정에 따라 개인정보를 파기하지 아니하고 보존하여야 하는 경우에는 해당 개인정보 또는 개인정보파일을 다른 개인정보와 분리해서 저장·관리 합니다.
③ 사무소는 파기사유가 발생한 개인정보를 선정하여 개인정보 보호책임자의 승인을 받아 해당 개인정보를 파기합니다.
④ 사무소는 파기하여야 할 개인정보가 전자적 파일 형태인 경우 복원이 불가능한 방법으로 영구 삭제하며, 이외의 기록물, 인쇄물, 서면, 그 밖의 기록매체인 경우 파쇄 또는 소각합니다.
제 7 조 (의견수렴 및 불만처리)
정보주체는 개인정보 보호 관련 문의, 불만처리, 피해구제 등에 관한 사항을 아래 개인정보 보호책임자 또는 담당부서에 문의하실 수 있습니다. 사무소는 정보주체의 문의에 대하여 신속하고 충분한 답변을 드릴 것입니다.
개인정보 보호 책임자 : 변호사
연락처 : 02.
제 8 조 (개인정보 처리방침의 변경)
사무소의 개인정보 처리방침은 관련 법령, 지침 및 사무소 내부규정에 따라 변경될 수 있으며, 개인정보 처리방침이 변경되는 경우 관련 법령이 정하는 방법에 따라 공개합니다.
제 9 조 (개인정보의 안전성 확보 조치)
사무소는 개인정보의 안전성 확보를 위해 다음과 같은 조치를 취하고 있습니다.
관리적 조치 : 내부관리계획의 수립 및 시행, 구성원에 대한 정기적인 개인정보 보호교육 등
기술적 조치 : 개인정보처리시스템 등의 접근권한 관리, 접근통제시스템 설치, 고유식별정보 등의 암호화, 보안프로그램의 설치 등
물리적 조치 : 전산실, 자료보관실 등 개인정보 보관장소에 대한 접근통제