SOUTH KOREA Law and Practice Contributed by: Sung Jin Kim, Jay J. Kim, Chunsoo Lee and Joe Kim, Kim & Chang
2.17 Summary of Significant Recent Product Liability Claims Below are two notable court cases that have had an impact on product liability litigation. PLA Precedence Over the Commercial Code A 2023 Supreme Court decision (Case No 2022 Da 230677, issued on 18 May 2023) clarified the relationship between the Korean Civil Code and the PLA. In this case, an apple producer purchased a plasma equipment that controls the ripeness of fruit, which emitted ozone when used in a refrig - erated storage unit. The apple producer sued the plasma equipment manufacturer, alleging that no proper warning was provided regarding the use of the equipment in refrigerated storage units. The plaintiff filed the claim citing tort under the Civil Code and the trial court and appellate court issued decisions by reviewing the tort claim only. However, the Supreme Court reversed the appellate court’s decision and ordered the low - er court to review the case under the PLA even though the plaintiff had not raised a claim under the PLA. This case clarified that the PLA takes prece - dence in product liability cases where the issue at dispute falls under the scope of both the PLA and the Civil Code. This means that defence counsels must review the applicability of the PLA in tort claims even if the plaintiff has not cited the PLA as a cause of action in the complaint. PLA Applicability to Non-End User Consumers A 2022 Supreme Court judgment (Supreme Court Decision No 2017 Da 213289, issued on 14 July 2022) expanded the applicability of the PLA to business entities as claimants, even if they are not end-user consumers.
A poultry farm business used a veterinarian medicine for the chickens raised on the farm. The medicine included an ingredient that was traceable in the eggs intended for sale to con - sumers and the poultry farm suffered damages as it could not sell those eggs. The farm sued the drug company for damages, claiming a labelling defect in the medicine under the PLA. The court ruled in favour of the plaintiff, stating that the drug manufacturer could have foreseen that the drug would be used on chickens whose eggs would be sold to consumers. Accordingly, the manufacturer should have provided proper warning to the farm and the failure to do so con - stituted a labelling defect under the PLA. The PLA is typically invoked by consumers who are end users of the manufactured product. This case illustrated that the PLA can apply even if the claim is brought by a business entity that is supplied with a product by another supplier. Thus, defence counsels must consider the pos - sibility of claims arising under the PLA when reviewing supply-related disputes among busi - ness entities. 3. Recent Policy Changes and Outlook 3.1 Trends in Product Liability and Product Safety Policy KATS Announces 2025 Product Safety Investigation Roadmap On 15 January 2025, KATS released its 2025 Product Safety Investigation Roadmap (the “Roadmap” ). In the Roadmap, KATS identified 5 “priority products” on which it plans to focus its investigation this year. The list of priority prod - ucts increased from 35 products in the previous
205 CHAMBERS.COM
Powered by FlippingBook