Archives for November 2007
Concerned Korean Scientists Beat Back Mandatory Homosexuality and Multi-Culti B.S.
by Brendon Carr
UPDATE 11/20 11:00 A.M.: All fun aside, Korea’s first Anti-Discrimination Act is an important step toward a fairer society that can include not only all persons of Korean descent who are heterosexual (or closeted) and in good health, but also gay and lesbian Koreans, foreigners, immigrants, and the disabled. There is a lot of brutal discrimination in society at this time, and first steps to reducing the impact are very important.
The Ministry of Justice reports to us that the bill has been withdrawn for further study and revision, and the new draft will be released to the public next Tuesday, November 27. We repeat that this law has NOT been passed by the National Assembly, and is not effective yet. MOJ predicts the revised bill will not come to a vote in the National Assembly until “March, sometime”.
Ordinarily, an important Korean statute not immediately needed by the financial industry will come into effect a year from its passing. Employment-related statutes, such as this one, frequently have two-year gaps between passage and effectiveness. Our estimate is that the soonest this law will become effective, therefore, is sometime in the spring of 2009.
Anyone wanting to stay informed on this law should watch Korea Law Blog and the Marmot’s Hole, or e-mail me (see the link to the right) to be placed on a list to receive a bulletin from Hwang Mok Park P.C.
Now back to the fun.
ORIGINAL POST:
On Wednesday the 7th, as I started finishing up our firm’s English translation of the pathbreaking Anti-Discrimination Act (a provisional title for a bill introduced October 2, but which hasn’t passed the National Assembly yet), the Human Rights Watch in New York City informed us that the Act was being watered down significantly in response to a petition from concerned citizens.
Predictably, the issue of sexual orientation was the primary lightning rod (heh heh, you said rod, heh heh):
The petition was spearheaded by the Assembly of Scientists Against Embryonic Cloning (Baeah-Bokjerul-Bandae-Hanun-Moim), which is directed by Professor Gill Wonpyong of Pusan University. Professor Gill has stated, “If homosexuality is allowed, the morals of our society will immediately collapse and the society will become a world of animals” (Newspower 10/23/2007)
I still remember the first time I was told “No Gay in Korea”. It was 1990. I believed it, too. How could such a definitive statement uttered so confidently by a man with his hand on my upper thigh be untrue?
But the intervening years have seen an explosion of gay in Korea capped by the emergence of Dong Bang Shin Ki (TVXQ) and Super Junior. Plus I have my suspicions about my partner Doil, who likes Westlife.
If we’re that close to Korea being a “world of animals” that a human-rights bill would cause immediate collapse, it seems these concerned scientists acted not a moment too soon. Plus, it seems the original draft of the bill was more far-reaching than I had expected:
A petition, spearheaded by an organization called the Assembly of Scientists Against Embryonic Cloning, was sent to all branches of government claiming that if the bill becomes law, “[H]omosexuals will try to seduce everyone, including adolescents; victims will be forced to become homosexuals; and sexual harassment by homosexuals will increase.” [emphasis added]
My main concern with gay marriage has previously been Why should homosexuals get to have all the sex? Make them get married too! I thought live and let live would be a good principle. But now that homosexuality is going to be mandatory for everyone, I’m concerned. Very concerned.
See, I haven’t kissed a dude since I got out of the Navy, except for that one New Year’s Eve party in law school. But I did that as a joke, and it was my choice. My Dad did kiss me on the lips in front of all those other recruits when he said goodbye to me at the Navy recruit depot, but that was just to embarrass and humiliate his son one last time.
Mandatory gayness is no joke! Yes, we’ll all dress more stylishly, live in better-decorated apartments, and have fabulous haircuts with the appropriate amount of product, but still… I just think it may be too late for me to pick up new skills. Thanks, Assembly of Scientists Against Embryonic Cloning! You’ve saved all our bacon.
The draft legislation first announced on October 2, 2007 by the Ministry of Justice included sexual orientation along with a range of other categories as prohibited grounds for discrimination.
But according to Democratic Labor Party officials and news reports, the original version of the law we broke our backs translating was changed to exclude protection from discrimination on the basis of sexual orientation, military status, nationality, language, appearance, family type, ideology, criminal or detention record, and educational status.
My associates and I have been busy for the last two weeks, and haven’t yet dug up a copy of the new version of this statute. So we haven’t yet confirmed that all of these protected statuses have been removed from the scope of protections in the Act.
Anyway, we busted our humps to produce a good translation so you’ll have to bear with me. All the good stuff relevant to this post is in the beginning of the Act in its definitions of what was to be prohibited conduct. Read it, and dream of paradise lost, homos:
Art. 2 - Definitions
Defined terms used in this Act shall have the following meanings:
1. “Gender” shall mean male, female, or any other sex which is difficult to classify as male or female.
2. “Disability” shall mean a condition in which physical and/or mental impairment or loss of function imposes considerable restrictions on the individual’s functioning or social life.
3. “Illness” shall include the following:
(a) The state in which a disease has been cured;
(b) The state in which a chronic disease is controlled through appropriate medical treatment; and
(c) The state in which a disease does not affect physical functions.
4. “Place of Origin” shall mean birthplace, place of family registration, and primary place of residence before attaining adulthood.
5. “Educational Achievement” shall mean graduation from or course completion of an educational institution prescribed in the Elementary and Secondary Education Act and the Higher Education Act; completion of a course of study in an educational training institution evaluated by the Minister of Education and Human Resources Development pursuant to the Act on Recognition of Credits, etc.; acquisition of a bachelor’s degree by passing an equivalency examination pursuant to the Act on the Acquisition of Academic Degrees through Self-Education; acquisition of academic degrees or certificates by completion of a course of study in a continuing-education institution pursuant to the Lifelong Education Act; as well as whether or not there is an academic record, graduation, or completion of a certain educational institution including grant of academic degrees pursuant to Art. 43 para. (1) and Art. 47, para. (1) of the Elementary and Secondary Education Act.
6. “Sexual Orientation” shall mean heterosexuality, homosexuality or bisexuality.
7. “Educational Institution” shall mean a nursery school according to the Article 6 of the Infant Care Act; any school pursuant to Art. 2, para. (2) of the Early Childhood Education Act, Art. 2 of the Elementary and Secondary Education Act and Art. 2 of the Higher Education Act; continuing-education institution pursuant to Art. 2, para. (3) of the Lifelong Education Act; educational training institution evaluated by the Minister of Education and Human Resources Development pursuant to the Act on Recognition of Credits, etc.; vocational education and training institution pursuant to Art. 2 of the Vocational Education and Training Promotion Act; and/or any other institution provided by the Presidential Enforcement Decree to this Act.
8. “Harassment” shall mean any or all acts causing physical pain, mental anguish, fear, sense of shame or insult to individuals or groups.
9. “Advertisement” shall mean any indication or advertisement defined in the Act on Fair Indication and Advertisement, Art. 2, paras. (1) and (2).
10. “Employer” shall mean a business proprietor, chief executive or any individual working on behalf of a business proprietor with respect to matters regarding employees.
Article 3 - Scope of Prohibited Discrimination
(1) Discrimination prohibited under this Act (hereinafter, “Discrimination") shall mean any unjustifiable act of separating, distinguishing, limiting, excluding or unfavorably treating an individual or group for reason of Gender, Disability, age, nationality of origin, race of origin, racial group, skin color, language, Place of Origin, Illness, physical condition (including appearance), marital status, pregnancy or childbirth, family type or situation, religion, ideology or political opinion, criminal record or record of institutionalization, Sexual Orientation, Educational Achievement, social status or the like (hereinafter, “Protected Status") in any area falling under the following subparagraphs:
1. Employment (including recruitment, hiring, training, posting, advancement, promotion, payment of salary and other valuables in lieu thereof, provision of company loan, age limit, retirement, dismissal and the like);
2. Provision or use of goods or services;
3. Education and vocational training at an educational institution; and
4. Execution of statutes and policies.
(2) Cases where a certain group or individual are unfavorably impacted without justifiable reason, even where neutral standards have been applied, shall be deemed Discrimination.
(3) Harassment due to Gender, Disability, racial group, skin color, nationality of origin, race of origin, skin color and/or Sexual Orientation shall be deemed Discrimination.
(4) Advertisements indicating or promoting separation, distinction, limitation, exclusion or unfavorable treatment of a certain individual or group shall be deemed Discrimination prohibited under this Act.
These definitions are extremely far-reaching, and added some categories—Educational Institution, and Educational Achievement—which hadn’t heretofore been included in Western concepts of anti-discrimination. I wasn’t at all sure how these could be implemented in fact, given Korea’s education mania.
But what’s this? Nationality, language and appearance (i.e. racial discrimination), family type (i.e. continuing to harass single-parent families and their children) and military service (i.e. gender discrimination against women, who aren’t drafted) are all back in the mix? Wait a minute. What kind of anti-discrimination measures are left? Kicking the homos is all well and good, but this looks like it falls on me.
We’ll follow this again as the revised bill gets released to the public.
More Property Fallout: Kwangju Regional Construction Group Foundering
by Brendon Carr
Another regional construction-based conglomerate is teetering on the edge. The JoongAng Ilbo’s English edition chalks it up to the traditional Korean cocktail of tax evasion and corporate embezzlement, but your Uncle B sees things a little differently.
The story starts off innocently enough, with a corporate chieftain accused of looking the other way while his team underpaid tax (it bears repeating the Representative Director bears criminal liabilities for the company), and having a little walking-around money duked his way when the company sold some property. In American parlance, pocketing some of the price is called “usurpation of a corporate opportunity”:
The Gwangju District Prosecutors’ Office sought a warrant yesterday to detain Huh Jae-ho, chairman of the Daeju Group, for evading 50.8 billion won ($55.4 million) in taxes and embezzling an additional 12.1 billion won.
The Daeju Group is a large business based in Gwangju, southwestern Korea, which runs 15 affiliates. They include shipbuilding, insurance, mutual banking and housing construction businesses, as well as a local newspaper and cable channel.
Huh, 65, is charged with directly or indirectly helping two of the group affiliates, Daeju Construction and Daeju Housing, evade both corporation taxes and surtaxes from 2005 to 2006, according to prosecutors.
“We found evidence that Huh was involved in the tax evasion process so we are asking him to take general responsibility because he is the head of the entire management team,” said a Gwangju prosecutor.
Huh insisted during the investigation that he never ordered his employees to evade taxes and did not intervene in any way, prosecutors said, though they said Huh told them he knew that tax evasions existed “habitually.”
The Seoul tax office asked prosecutors to investigate Daeju after they found billions of won unaccounted for during a two-month audit in June and August.
Huh is also charged with personally stealing 12.1 billion won that had been earmarked for the Daeju Corporation to invest. That money is part of what a Busan apartment developer paid to Daeju Construction for redeveloping a 396,000 square-meter (98 acre) apartment complex in Yongho-dong, Busan, prosecutors said.
But what was really behind these moves? I think Roh Moo Hyun’s economic management helped do this company in. The company is teetering because of overdevelopment of property in the provinces, one of the planks of Roh’s “balanced regional development” mantra. It now cannot repay all the money borrowed for that development.
I won’t cry for the loss of another greedy chairman, but it seems that Daeju has contracted-for apartments for 10,000 families in the pipeline—apartments that may or may not get finished if the company fails:
Daeju, which was founded in 1981, is also facing a growing problem from a lack of liquidity.
Aside from the president’s personal fraud, Daeju Construction is liable for W520 billion in debt from an apartment complex business in Mugeo-dong, Ulsan. It tried to survive by selling off the land to build a golf course. In addition, it sold its affiliate, Daehan Insurance, in September and obtained 1 trillion won to help with its liquidity.
If the company goes into bankruptcy, the worst possible scenario, critics said it would hurt at least 10,000 residents who have already purchased the apartments that Daeju Construction is developing.
The misery is still largely confined to the provinces, which carry 90% of the nation’s unsold apartment inventory, but last month saw a spike of more than 57% in the unsold inventory in Seoul [Korean-language source]. This is a worrisome development.
Mark my words: Korea is commencing a repeat of Japan’s deflation-led “Lost Decades”, where policymakers caused, then prolonged, an unprecedented period of economic hardship for the Japanese people. As for me, it’s not a big problem because I’m in a profession which thrives in such times—hello, bankruptcy practice—but for the rest of Korea this is not optimal.
Korean Supreme Court Rejects Admissibility of Evidence Obtained Illegally
by Brendon Carr
A real bombshell in the papers today and a slap in the face of Korea’s all-powerful public prosecution. The Supreme Court has finally issued a definitive ruling concerning the admissibility of evidence obtained by the prosecution “illegally”, or outside the boundaries of limited authority granted to the prosecution under a search warrant. This is really big news. From the JoongAng Daily:
Ending a long standing legal controversy, the nation’s highest court yesterday ruled that evidence gathered illegally can never be accepted in a trial, and ordered Jeju Governor Kim Tae-hwan to be tried again on a charge of violating the country’s election law.
In the past, evidence gathered illegally — except for testimony gathered under unlawful circumstances — could be admitted in court, the ruling said.
“Evidence gathered unlawfully can not be accepted,” said yesterday’s Supreme Court ruling, signed by 11 judges. “The procedures were made to protect basic human rights.”
In response to this fact, the Court kicked back a guilty verdict against Kim and remanded the case for re-trial, this time without the evidence grabbed unlawfully.
Kim can remain in office until the Gwangju High Court tries the case without the evidence that the Supreme Court said was gathered illegally.
During his trial, Kim said that certain documents confiscated during the investigation had been taken from places not specified in the search warrant, so the evidence should not have been considered. Prosecutors claimed the process was legitimate.
The article also notes an important development which I hadn’t noticed yet this year—more rules establishing rules of evidence are on the way:
A stricter, more comprehensive law tightening standards for how evidence is gathered, defining what constitutes evidence and covering investigative procedures, passed the National Assembly. It is expected to be introduced next year.
Note that the above rules of evidence and requirement to exclude the illegally-obtained evidence are probably applicable to criminal procedure only, as the Supreme Court precedent reported by the JoongAng is based on an existing rule in the Code of Criminal Procedure.
This leaves open the possibility that evidence gathered by prosecutors in the course of a criminal investigation, even if not admissible for criminal purposes, could still turn up in civil process—as it is an ordinary component of civil process to use (or abuse, depending on your perspective) the prosecution’s investigative power to gather evidence which is not obtainable through civil discovery.
Builders Having Trouble Moving Apartments in Seoul
by Brendon Carr
...now also in the crappier parts of the city, not just Kangnam. And affordability appears to be one of the factors (along with, I would guess, buyers’ uncertainty over whether we’re at the top of the market and whether the government is going to continue to meddle in the market).
The Dong-A Ilbo’s English edition reports that GS (formerly LG) Engineering & Construction, one of the top “brand-name” builders, can’t sell apartments it’s just completed in the rather downmarket northeast Seoul Jungrang-gu district, between Dongdaemun-gu and Hanam City. Only a quarter of the apartments, priced at W16.5 million per pyong (3.3m²), have been sold:
GS E&C constructed 411 units in the high-rise residential-commercial complex ‘Muk-dong Xi’, in Jungrang-gu, Seoul. Up to now, only 94 people, including those considered third priority, have applied to buy, creating a competitive rate of just 0.23. The going rate is 16.5 million won per 3.3m².
It’s puzzling, because the “Xi” (pronounced, if you’re curious, like “guy” if that word started with a “j") brand of apartments has one of the highest-quality perceptions. Perhaps in that neighborhood, W16.5 million is just too expensive. My guess is there are a lot of families earning W33 million per year—maybe they can’t justify saving 16 years’ income for the purchase of that apartment. (Even though 16 times income might seem excessive, it’s actually less than the median multiple of 19.5 for new apartments in Seoul.)
Demand for (relatively) affordable units somewhat near Seoul does not seem to be a problem, with price-slashed apartments in the satellite city of Yongin oversubscribed:
Conversely, Heungdeok district in Yongin City saw new and inexpensive apartments selling like hot cakes. Units in an apartment complex named ‘Hoban Verdium’ were offered at a 30% discount, or 10.6 million won per 3.3m². In this case there were 6,837 applicants competing for 229 units.
Thirty applicants for each apartment! This says to me that 32 pyong (1165 sq. ft gross space, 875 sq. ft net space) apartment units for W340 million (about US$373,000 at current exchange rates), a 45-minute commute away from Seoul on a good day, are perceived to be a raging bargain.
Apartments in Yongin are reportedly selling for prices generally about W17 million per pyong, which means that the buyers of Hoban Verdium basically won the lottery, But a 30%-off fire sale? I wonder if Hoban Construction and Hankook Construction, the builders, are facing the rumored cash crunch thanks to Roh’s intervention in the market.
Ex Post Taxo: Korean Government Renegs on Tax Advice
by Brendon Carr
Government of Singapore Investment Corporation (GIC) today found out about Korea’s regrettable preference for “flexibility” in re-interpreting laws. The Seoul Administrative Court, ruling on GIC’s appeal against a tax assessment by the Gangnam District Office for deemed acquisition tax in GIC’s December 2004 acquisition of Star Tower, upheld the district’s April 2007 tax grab:
[GIC] used two paper companies to complete the transaction, with neither holding fully 51 percent of the property. Under Korean law, a company buying more than 51 percent of an asset is subject to acquisition tax as the “controlling shareholder.”
The Gangnam District Office slapped a 17 billion won ($18.7 million) acquisition tax on the deal, reasoning that the two firms were merely paper companies that were not officially in operation, and that the Singaporean government company was the controlling shareholder.
The Seoul court said, “As the mother company has full control of its two subsidiaries, the legal liability for share acquisition [in Star Tower] will go to the Government of Singapore Investment Corporation.”
Note the term “paper company”. Korea hates “paper companies”, despite the fact that at the end of the day, all companies are essentially just paper.
The deemed acquisition tax-driven two company asset purchase structure has been a staple of corporate practice since I’ve been working here in Korea—which means since 1997. In all cases when I’ve worked on such a deal, where the client faces a potential liability that is relatively large the client seeks not only the legal opinion of a leading law firm, but also a written revenue-ruling letter from the National Tax Service. Informed sources tell me that’s what happened in the GIC case in 2004.
In other words, the Korean government’s tax authority advised a foreign investor in advance of a deal, Go ahead, your proposed investment structure will not result in deemed acquisition tax. But that caution did GIC no good: The administrative court says We don’t care what you’ve been told. Your mistake was believing the government.
As a friend mused earlier today, the real mistake GIC made was purchasing an asset from Public Enemy No. 1, Lone Star Funds. Once the mob mentality took hold and made Lone Star and all its assets radioactive, the outcome for GIC was pre-ordained. The good news is it probably won’t break GIC: The Star Tower asset was purchased for W930 billion won—what’s an extra W17 billion?
GIC seems bound to appeal the Administrative Court’s ruling. And it’s an important issue—nearly every large investment in Korea, foreign and domestic, has been structured around the deemed acquisition tax. The amounts at stake could be trillions of won. But also the future of the country is at stake. If the court system does not produce justice for foreign investors who act prudently and structure according to the laws then in effect at the time of their investments, Korea could find itself very lonely in the FDI derby for a very long time.
KFTC Fines 10 Pharmas, Refers Criminal Charges
by Brendon Carr
Before the weekend, the Korea Times reported another heavy sanction imposed by Korea’s newly-energetic Fair Trade Commission:
The country’s corporate watchdog said Thursday that it has imposed a combined 19.9 billion won ($22 million) in fines on 10 local pharmaceutical companies for unfair trading practices, including the provision of illegal rebates to hospitals and wholesalers.
The Fair Trade Commission (FTC) said that it also plans to refer five out of the 10 companies that profiteered the most from the unfair trading, soon to prosecutors.[...]
“Rebates and other kickbacks given by the 10 firms amounted to 522.8 billion won,” an FTC spokesman said. “It is not a matter that can be sufficiently dealt with by administrative measures such as fines. We have decided an investigation by the prosecution is necessary."[...]
[The FTC] estimated that the illegal practices have caused damage worth about 2.18 trillion won to consumers.
On Monday, FTC Chairman Kwon Oh-seung indicated that his commission could scrutinize major hospitals nationwide in relation to the illegal business practices by the pharmaceutical industry.[...]
“It could be a problem of institution or policies, or just a scandal. I don’t think that it is a matter to be dealt with simply by fines,” he said. “So we are thinking of ways to make the industry more competitive institutionally.”
“Rebate” is the Korean euphemism for a kickback. Money spent by the hospital—invoiced and entered on its accounting books—for its drug purchases is often “rebated” to the purchasing manager surreptitiously (a personal bribe), or paid into a slush-fund account of the hospital (an institutional bribe) to be spent on “official purposes”—morale-building activities such as excursions to expensive hostess bars, or on corrupt payments to public officials. Often the money is divided between the personal bribe to the purchasing manager and the institutional bribe; the individual bribe helps buy the silence of the purchasing manager.
The medical sector, perhaps because it is subject to strict state controls on costs and takes much of its funding not from patients but from the National Health Insurance Plan, might be the dirtiest in Korea. (If fraud in the medical industry is surpassed by any sector that would have to be construction.)
Of the major fraud/embezzlement cases and corporate corruption cases that I’ve worked on over my career, a sizeable plurality have come from or been linked to companies doing business with Korean hospitals. The corruption and fraud in the medical sector are corrosive influences on any multinational’s code of conduct. Any attention that the KFTC can lend to clean up this sector will be effort well spent.
Private Equity and Chicken Entrepreneurs Investing in Pyongyang
by Brendon Carr
Emerging-markets asset management company Fabien Pictet and Partners is reported to be sniffing around Pyongyang for investment opportunities, and to intend a North Korea private equity fund. There are a few other North Korea funds in the raising, but finding the opportunities may be difficult:
“It would be very difficult to put more than $50 million directly into North Korea,” said [Fabien Pictet CEO Richard] Yarlott, 47, who helps manage $750 million of bonds and equities.
Maybe so, but the North Korean economic revival, when it ever comes, is probably going to depend more on re-establishment of entrepreneurial activity than on large investments in industrial capacity. Here’s one of the pioneers who will either be a hero of the new North Korean economy or another sucker fleeced by the Korean Workers’ Party—South Korean “Matdaero” chicken-franchise entrepreneur Choi Won-Ho said yesterday he would open a restaurant in a joint venture with a North Korean state-run trading company later this month.
Here’s what the paper—and all the wires, who seem to be writing from the same press release—has to say:
Choi has invested 500 million won ($551,000) in the restaurant’s cooking facilities, interior decoration and delivery scooters. He will split the profit 70-30 with the North Korean firm.
Choi, 48, who has been a chicken entrepreneur for 15 years, said there should be sufficient demand despite North Korea being one of the world’s poorest countries, because he plans to offer lower prices to locals.
“I will charge about $3 for a whole chicken for North Koreans and at least $12, the same price as in South Korea, for tourists from the South and other countries,” Choi said yesterday by phone. “One whole chicken will be enough for a four-member family, so the price of $3 will not be too burdensome for special occasions.”
Ah, yes—lower prices for locals. I know this phenomenon well.
But Choi’s probably right about the price point. My wife remembers life in a poorer South Korea, when a family night out for a ten-dollar chicken dinner with all the fixins and soft drinks for the kids was big-time treat—something her family could only afford once a month, if that often. Now, of course, that same dinner costs pocket money. But the small luxuries point the way to better days. If North Korea can tolerate the spread of a consumer society, with entrepreneurs encouraged to open small businesses (the 70-30 joint venture is really kind of a tax, which means the state could also make the same deal with North Korean citizens), maybe we’re on to something.
One does wonder how he managed to spend half a million dollars, though: His staff reportedly numbers 20, including delivery drivers, and the restaurant has seating for 50. That’s not a huge restaurant, and one would imagine the real estate would come cheap—maybe even the contribution from the JV partner. The capital expense here in Seoul, including the rent deposit, would scarcely approach 2/3 that level—so something seems to be awry.
I wonder if there will be delivery to the Yanggakdo Hotel, colorfully described in The Economist as an Alcatraz of fun for foreigners visiting the city. See also this recent travelogue for another view of life in North Korea. Anyway, as for me, I won’t be moving to Pyongyang until a few Indian restaurants and a good Tex-Mex restaurant opens up and stays in business there.
Non-Tariff Trade Barriers in Action: New “Standard” for Laptop Power Adaptors
by Brendon Carr
I saw the following story in the Dong-A Ilbo’s English edition today. This is a prime example of how Korea Inc. adopts its own unique standards in collusion with (or, perhaps, over the objections of) domestic manufacturers in order to disadvantage foreign manufacturers. It’s easy for the domestic companies, which make their entire market here in Korea, to engineer specifically for local “standards”, but for foreign makers—who might have market shares of less than 1% here in Korea and whose worldwide sales don’t exactly depend on Korea—it’s very difficult to justify the expense of a special product just for this country.
And voila!, the foreign companies may be magically kept away without any directly “discriminatory” practices. Check this out:
Notebook users may no longer have to carry a power adapter in their bag from as early as 2009, because laptop power adapters are set to be standardized.
Different standards for notebook AC adapters by each manufacturer and product model have always been cause for great inconvenience.
The Korean Agency for Technology and Standards (KATS) announced Wednesday that it has gauged public opinion on the matter for more than one year and has established “The Standard for Portable Notebook PC Power Adapters.” The KATS will hold its first public hearing on the issue on Thursday.
“We plan to apply the standard from January 2009, after completing the notification and enactment process by the end of this year,” said Song Yang-hoi, a senior official of the KATS. “We are also considering determining the new standard as a Korean Industrial Standard (KS) and enforcing mandatory acquisition of the Electrical Appliances Safety Certificate for all laptop power adapters.”
Once it becomes compulsory to manufacture standardized laptop power adapters, people will be able to use other people’s adapters, similar to the standardized adaptors of mobile phones. Another advantage is that customers will not have to purchase an additional power adapter when purchasing a notebook.
Thus far, customers have no choice but to buy a power adapter, which cost about 50,000 won, every time they purchase a notebook, due to incompatibility between the power adapters of various models.
Laptop manufacturers have opposed standardization, noting that it will restrict the freedom of developing a variety of models and that it will be difficult to find out who is responsible for accidents if they occur due to the use of low-quality power adapters.
However, the KATS recently completed the draft standard by persuading six domestic computer manufacturers - Samsung Electronics, LG Electronics, Trigem Korea, Daewoo Lucoms, Jooyon Tech, and Hyunju Computer - to comply. Moreover, the standards agency said that foreign companies, such as Intel, Lenovo, and HP, have also showed positive responses to its plan.
The standardized power adapter for 14-inch LCD notebooks has an output of 60 watts and 19±1 voltage. The size of connecters has also been standardized to a diameter of 6.5±0.1mm and a length of 9.5±0.3mm.
The Telecommunication Technology Association also plans to announce standards for the mini-chargers and earphone jacks for slim cell-phones on November 8.
I hope that the next generation of laptops doesn’t need more than 60 watts. My MacBook, luckily, only needs a 60-watt adapter, so I can keep on using it—but the MacBook Pro takes 85 watts. What’s that you say? The power supplies for MacBook and MacBook Pro use Apple’s patented and superior MagSafe connector? Oh well, guess Apple ought to engineer a special Korea-only plug for all its laptops.
-
About Korea Law Blog
Korea Law Blog is brought to you by Brendon Carr, an American lawyer working as a foreign legal consultant for more than 10 years in Seoul. (Brendon is not admitted as an attorney in Korea. But you knew that.) -
Contact Details
-
Tel. +82 (0)2 772 2734
Fax +82 (0)2 772 2800
Mobile +82 (0)10 8788 0750 -
Download My FREE Korea Employment Law FAQ
-
Korean Media
-
Blogroll
-