International Litigation Lawyer
International Litigation Lawyer | How cross-border civil cases actually proceed in Korea
International litigation refers to civil cases where at least one party is a foreign national, a foreign company, or resides outside Korea, or where the dispute itself arose overseas. Before the merits of the case are even reached, three threshold questions must be resolved: which country's court has jurisdiction (국제사법 제2조), how documents can be validly served on a party abroad, and which country's substantive law applies to the dispute. Even after a Korean court issues a favorable judgment, it may not automatically be enforceable abroad, and a foreign judgment is not automatically enforceable in Korea either — it requires a separate recognition and enforcement procedure (민사집행법 제26조, 제27조). Getting these procedural steps wrong at the outset can add months or years to a case.
International Litigation | Which country's court can hear the case
Before anything else, a Korean court must confirm it has international jurisdiction over the dispute. This is not automatic just because one party is Korean.
The general standard: substantial connection
Korean courts have international jurisdiction where the case or the parties have a substantial connection to Korea, and jurisdiction is determined by reasonably applying domestic jurisdiction rules while accounting for the international nature of the case (국제사법 제2조 제1항). Factors such as the defendant's habitual residence, the place where the contract was performed, or where the tort occurred are all weighed together, so there is rarely a single decisive factor.
Jurisdiction agreements in contracts
Many cross-border contracts include a clause designating the courts of a specific country. Korean courts generally respect these agreements, but an exclusive jurisdiction clause can be found invalid if it results in a jurisdiction with no reasonable connection to the dispute or produces a grossly unfair result for one side. Reviewing the actual wording of the clause, not just its label, is often the first step in these cases.
Parallel proceedings in two countries
It is not unusual for related lawsuits to be filed in two different countries around the same time. Korean law allows a Korean court to consider staying its own proceedings if the same case is already pending abroad and recognition of that foreign judgment is expected (국제사법 제11조), which makes early strategic choices about where to file the initial suit important.
International Litigation | Serving documents on a party outside Korea
A lawsuit cannot proceed unless the other side is properly notified, and notifying someone abroad follows different rules than serving someone in Korea.
Methods available under treaty and domestic law
Where the destination country is a party to the Hague Service Convention, service is generally routed through that country's designated Central Authority. Where no such treaty framework applies, service typically proceeds through diplomatic or consular channels under the Civil Procedure Act's provisions on service abroad (민사소송법 제191조). Which method applies depends entirely on the recipient's country, so this needs to be confirmed at the very start of a case.
Delays are the norm, not the exception
Service through a foreign Central Authority or consulate commonly takes several months, and can take over a year in some jurisdictions or if the initial documents are rejected for translation or formatting issues. Preparing complete and properly translated documents on the first attempt is one of the few things that meaningfully shortens this timeline.
International Litigation | Which country's law applies, and how to prove foreign law
Even once a Korean court has jurisdiction, it may still need to apply a foreign country's law to decide the substance of the dispute.
Choice of law rules
The Private International Act sets out which country's law governs different types of disputes — for example, contract disputes are generally governed by the law the parties chose, or absent such a choice, the law of the country most closely connected to the contract (국제사법 제45조, 제46조). Tort claims and other categories each have their own connecting rules, so the applicable law can differ issue by issue within a single case.
Proving what foreign law says
A Korean court does not automatically know the content of, say, California contract law or Vietnamese labor law — it must be proven as a fact, typically through expert opinions, legal texts, or certified translations of the relevant foreign statutes. Collecting this evidence early, often with the help of local counsel in the other country, is one of the more resource-intensive parts of an international case.
Gathering evidence located abroad
Documents, witnesses, or records located overseas cannot simply be subpoenaed the way they could within Korea. Requests are typically made through letters of request to the foreign court or, where available, cooperation between the parties' respective counsel, and this evidence-gathering timeline should be built into the overall case plan from the outset.
International Litigation | Enforcing a judgment across the border
Winning the case is not the end of the story if the losing party or their assets are in a different country from where judgment was entered.
Enforcing a foreign judgment in Korea
A final foreign judgment can be enforced in Korea only after a Korean court issues an execution judgment recognizing it, which requires confirming that the foreign court had proper jurisdiction, the defendant was properly served or appeared, the judgment does not violate Korean public policy, and reciprocity exists with that country (민사소송법 제217조, 민사집행법 제26조·제27조). Korean courts generally do not re-examine the merits of the foreign decision itself.
Enforcing a Korean judgment abroad
Whether a Korean judgment can be enforced in another country depends entirely on that country's own law and any applicable treaty, since Korea is not a party to many of the international judgment-enforcement conventions other countries have joined. This is worth checking before filing suit in Korea if the defendant's only meaningful assets are located overseas.
⚠ Enforcement requires a separate court procedure
A foreign judgment is not automatically effective in Korea, and a Korean judgment is not automatically effective abroad. Each direction requires a formal recognition or enforcement procedure, and the requirements should be checked before litigation begins, not after judgment.
International Litigation | From initial consultation to enforcement
We review the facts, any contract and jurisdiction/arbitration clauses, and the location of the parties and assets to determine whether Korea is a viable and strategic forum.
The complaint is filed and, if the counterparty is abroad, the appropriate service method (Hague Convention, consular, or diplomatic channel) is initiated — this stage often takes the longest.
Domestic evidence is gathered alongside expert opinions on foreign law and, where needed, requests for evidence located outside Korea.
The case proceeds through hearings addressing both the jurisdictional/choice-of-law issues and the substantive dispute, which are sometimes argued separately.
Once judgment is issued, if assets are located abroad, a separate recognition or enforcement process in that country is pursued; if enforcing a foreign judgment in Korea, an execution judgment is sought here.
International Litigation | How fees are typically calculated in cross-border cases
Generally set based on the complexity of the jurisdictional issues, the number of countries involved, and whether translation or foreign counsel coordination is required from the outset.
Where applicable, typically calculated as a percentage of the amount actually recovered or the value successfully defended, agreed in advance in the engagement agreement.
Documents for service abroad, evidence in a foreign language, and foreign law materials generally require certified translation, which is billed separately as it depends heavily on document volume.
Consular or Central Authority service fees, and any fees for local counsel abroad who assist with evidence collection or enforcement, are additional costs specific to cross-border cases.
Standard Korean court filing fees and stamp duties apply based on the amount in dispute, in addition to any cross-border-specific expenses above.
※ Costs vary depending on case complexity and specific circumstances; exact fees will be provided during consultation. No specific outcome is guaranteed.
International Litigation | Self-Check Before You Start
1️⃣ If you are considering suing a foreign party
- Does the foreign party have any assets, branch, or business presence in Korea?
- Is there a jurisdiction or arbitration clause in any contract between you?
- Do you know the foreign party's exact registered address for service purposes?
- Would a Korean judgment actually be enforceable where their assets are located?
2️⃣ If you have been sued or notified of a foreign lawsuit
- Did you receive the documents through a formal service channel (not just email or courier)?
- Is the deadline to respond calculated correctly given the service method used?
- Does the foreign court arguably lack jurisdiction over you or this dispute?
- Have you checked whether a default judgment there could later be enforced against your assets in Korea?
3️⃣ If your dispute involves a cross-border contract
- Does the contract specify a governing law and a jurisdiction clause?
- Was the contract negotiated and signed in more than one country?
- Do you have translated copies of all key contract documents and communications?
- Is there a possibility the other side will file a competing lawsuit in their own country?
4️⃣ If you need to enforce a judgment across a border
- Is the judgment you are trying to enforce already final and non-appealable?
- Do you know whether reciprocity exists between Korea and the relevant country?
- Have you identified where the debtor's actual, seizable assets are located?
- Do you have a certified translation of the full judgment and case record?
