 |
[Alpha Biz=(Chicago) Reporter Kim Jisun] SK Group Chairman Choi Tae-won and SK Corp. won a lawsuit filed against the Fair Trade Commission's sanctions on SK Siltron's alleged defraudation of private interests.
According to the business community on the 25th, the Administration Department 6-2 of the Seoul High Court ruled to cancel both corrective orders and fines in a lawsuit filed by Chairman Choi and SK against the Fair Trade Commission. SK acquired a 51% stake in LG Siltron (currently SK Siltron), a semiconductor wafer producer, in January 2017, and purchased only 19.6% of the remaining 49% stake in April of the same year, and the remaining 29.4% was later bought by Chairman Choi.
In response, the FTC believed that Choi's acquisition of the stake intercepted business opportunities for the holding company SK, and issued 800 million won in fines and correction orders for Choi and SK in December 2021, respectively. The FTC concluded that SK made concessions without reasonable consideration after Chairman Choi showed his intention to take over the remaining stake in Siltron, and as a result, Chairman Choi gained unfair profits.
Chairman Choi and SK filed a lawsuit against it. They argued that it was difficult to conclude that SK did not acquire additional shares at the time as "providing business opportunities."
At that time, SK argued that there was no reason to secure a 100% stake at risk because it was able to exercise stable management rights only by acquiring some of the shares (19.6%) held by KTB PE out of LG Siltron's remaining 49% stake. It also claimed that the creditors' stake (29.4%) of the Report Fund, including Woori Bank, was only duly secured by participating in fair competitive bidding based on strategic judgment and that he had never colluded with creditors in advance or benefited unfairly.
The FTC countered that it made it difficult for SK executives and employees to participate in the bidding by helping Chairman Choi acquire his stake or refusing to request due diligence on Siltron. It also countered that it did not comply with the decision-making procedures under the commercial law, including the approval of the board of directors, even though it was in a 'conflict of interest' situation.
After reviewing the logic of both sides, the court seems to have judged that SK's claim is correct.
AlphaBIZ 김지선(stockmk2020@alphabiz.co.kr)
