South Korean Blogger Acquitted
Headline Legal News
A South Korean court on Monday acquitted a blogger accused of causingthe country huge financial losses by spreading misleading informationon the economy.
Prosecutors had sought an 18-month prison term for Park Dae-Sung, 30 --better known by his Internet alias "Minerva" -- while some mediafreedom groups criticised the decision to charge him.
Parkwas arrested in early January and charged with spreading online rumoursthat the government in late December ordered local banks not to buydollars as part of efforts to stabilise the won.
Prosecutorsclaimed the December posting led to dollar hoarding, forcing thegovernment hurriedly to inject two billion dollars to stabilise thecurrency market.
"Considering all the circumstances, it is hardto conclude that Park was aware the information was misleading when hewrote the postings," said Judge Yoo Young-Hyun of Seoul CentralDistrict Court.
The judge said that even if Park had realised theinformation was false, it cannot be concluded he intended to damage thepublic interest, considering the circumstances at the time or thespecial characteristics of the foreign exchange market.
Parkwrote more than 200 economic commentaries in recent months and gained amajor following after correctly predicting the collapse of USinvestment bank Lehman Brothers last September.
Related listings
-
Davis Polk Recruit Ex-SEC Aide
Headline Legal News 04/17/2009Law firm Davis Polk & Wardwell recruited the Securities andExchange Commission's former enforcement chief and another formerhigh-level government lawyer to join its white-collar defense group,part of an effort to expand its Washington practice. L...
-
18-month sentence for South Korean blogger
Headline Legal News 04/16/2009Prosecutors demanded an 18-month sentenceMonday for a popular South Korean blogger who is accused of spreadingfalse financial information in a case that has ignited a debate aboutfreedom of speech in cyberspace. The 30-year-old blogger, a fierce crit...
-
El Segundo Ponzi Scheme Targets Latinos
Headline Legal News 04/15/2009An El Segundo woman took $23 million in a Ponzi scheme that targeted Latinos, the SEC says in Los Angles Federal Court. Clelia A. Flores and her business, Maximum Return Investments, took the money from more than 150 people in seven states, by "guara...
Workers’ Compensation Subrogation of Administrative Fees and Costs
When a worker covered by workers’ compensation makes a claim against a third party, the workers’ compensation insurance retains the right to subrogate against any recovery from that third party for all benefits paid to or on behalf of a claimant injured at work. When subrogating for more than basic medical and indemnity benefits, the Texas workers’ compensation subrogation statute provides that “the net amount recovered by a claimant in a third‑party action shall be used to reimburse the carrier for benefits, including medical benefits that have been paid for the compensable injury.” TX Labor Code § 417.002.
In fact, all 50 states provide for similar subrogation. However, none of them precisely outlines which payments or costs paid by a compensation carrier constitute “compensation” and can be recovered. The result is industry-wide confusion and an ongoing debate and argument with claimants’ attorneys over what can and can’t be included in a carrier’s lien for recovery purposes.
In addition to medical expenses, death benefits, funeral costs and/or indemnity benefits for lost wages and loss of earning capacity resulting from a compensable injury, workers’ compensation insurance carriers also expend considerable dollars for case management costs, medical bill audit fees, rehabilitation benefits, nurse case worker fees, and other similar fees. They also incur other expenses in conjunction with the handling and adjusting of workers’ compensation claims. Workers’ compensation carriers typically assert, of course, that, they are entitled to reimbursement for such expenditures when it recovers its workers’ compensation lien. Injured workers and their attorneys disagree.