Abstract
Blockchains are used to record all transactions into online ledgers, which are subsequently saved onto many blocks across the Internet. The popularity of cryptocurrencies, which make use of blockchain technology, has made the public interested in blockchain technology. Blockchain technology, however, is used in many fields, including cryptocurrencies. This chapter deals with two issues raised by the Korean legal community in terms of blockchain technology. One is intellectual property-related issues of open source software on which blockchain technology is based. The other issue concerns how to guarantee the authenticity of e-Appostilles by using blockchain technology. The lack of authenticity of e-Appostilles is a big legal hurdle which prevents e-Appostilles from gaining popularity in many countries. Blockchain computing is a good solution for guaranteeing the authenticity of e-Appostilles. In this regard, the chapter illustrates an inherent legal issue of blockchain technology and blockchain technology as a method to solve a current legal problem. At the outset, this chapter indicates that blockchain technology based on open source software can be subject to intellectual property-related issues. Also, this chapter ensures that blockchain technology can enhance the world-wide application of e-Appostilles. However, it is necessary for each country to employ the technology which complies with its domestic law on digital signatures, on electronic documents, and on public notaries prior to application of the new technology. In cases where the underlying public document is paper, compared to a digital file and overseas Koreans request issuance of e-Apostilles, the issuing authority’s legal system needs to be adopted to issue English electronic public documents as its underlying public document. Otherwise, overseas Koreans should have to notarize the translated version of paper-typed public documents. It is an inefficient and cumbersome process. Also, this paper illustrates that blockchain technology can establish a decentralized and secure system of e-Register for e-Apostilles by preventing each Contracting Party to the Apostille Convention from joining unified e-Register system advised by an international organization.
This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.
Access this chapter
Tax calculation will be finalised at checkout
Purchases are for personal use only
Notes
- 1.
Galavis (2019), p. 563.
- 2.
See, e.g., Jeffery (2017).
- 3.
See, e.g., Hammerschmidt (2017).
- 4.
See Miles (2017).
- 5.
Kasireddy (2018).
- 6.
2015 Bill Text NH H.B. 552.
- 7.
Ehrsam (2017).
- 8.
Wright and De Filippi (2015), pp. 27–28.
- 9.
Sung (2018), p. 72.
- 10.
Korea Copyright Commission, Open Source SW License Information Systems. Available at: https://www.olis.or.kr/en/LicenseIntroduction.do. Accessed 30 June 2019.
- 11.
- 12.
Lee (2006), pp. 953–956.
- 13.
Korean Patent Court Decision on August 29, 2013, pp. 1–42 (Case No. 2013 Heo 1023).
- 14.
Korean Patent Court Decision on August 29, 2013, pp. 1–42 (Case No. 2013 Heo 1023).
- 15.
Korean Patent Court Decision on August 29, 2013, pp. 3, 13 (Case No. 2013 Heo 1023).
- 16.
Korean Supreme Court Decision on February 12, 2009, pp. 1–4 (Case No. 2006 Do 8369).
- 17.
Dong and Kim (2010), p. 15.
- 18.
Dong and Kim (2010), p. 15.
- 19.
VTUN is the open source software which improves network transfer speed by implementing channel bonding.
- 20.
ETUN is a VPN software mainly developed by defendant A together with B, C, and D under the employment of ElimNet from September 2002 to March 2004 based on the VTUN. A accepted a suggestion by HaionNet to join its VPN business on October 2004 and turned VTUN. HL which adds some improvement of ETUN over to an employee of HaionNet on November 2004. Afterward, A resigned from ElimNet without transferring the source code of ETUN to ElimNet while keeping the copy personally and by the request of the employee of HaionNet fixed some bug of ETUN and named it HAI, and the employee of HaionNet commenced the commercial service using HAI since January 2005. While ElimNet and HaionNet are the only companies providing VPN service based on VTUN code in Korea, and HaionNet’s HAI and ElimNet’s ETUN share much of their source codes, HaionNet dishonestly advertised on its homepage and in business promotion that HAI to was an innovative technology developed on June 2004 on its own.
- 21.
Korean Supreme Court Decision on February 12, 2009, p. 4 (Case No. 2006 Do 8369).
- 22.
Korean Supreme Court Decision on February 12, 2009, p. 4 (Case No. 2006 Do 8369).
- 23.
Samsung Open Source Release Center, available at http://opensource.samsung.com/ (accessed on June 22, 2019).
- 24.
LG OpenSource CodeDistribution. Available at: http://www.lg.com/global/support/opensource/opensource.jsp. Accessed June 22, 2019.
- 25.
Lee et al. (2012), p. 23.
- 26.
Sohn (2012), pp. 87 and 114.
- 27.
Offerman, Open versus Closed Source: A Delicate Balance. Available at: https://joinup.ec.europa.eu/elibrary/case/open-versus-closed-source-delicate-balance.
- 28.
Offerman, Open versus Closed Source: a Delicate Balance. Available at: https://joinup.ec.europa.eu/elibrary/case/open-versus-closed-source-delicate-balance. Accessed 24 June 2019.
- 29.
HCCH, HCCH Convention of 5 October 1961 Abolishing the Requirement of Legalisation for Foreign Public Documents, p. 1. Available at: https://assets.hcch.net/docs/80d0e86f-7da8-46f8-8164-df046285bcdd.pdf. Accessed 20 July 2019.
- 30.
HCCH, Status Table: Convention of 5 October 1961 Abolishing the Requirement of Legalisation for Foreign Public Documents. Available at: https://www.hcch.net/en/instruments/conventions/status-table/?cid=41. Accessed 20 July 2019.
- 31.
HCCH, Status Table: Convention of 5 October 1961 Abolishing the Requirement of Legalisation for Foreign Public Documents. Available at: https://www.hcch.net/en/instruments/conventions/status-table/?cid=41. Accessed 20 July 2019.
- 32.
Article 1 of Apostille Convention.
- 33.
Lee et al. (2017), p. 39.
- 34.
Lee et al. (2017), p. 39.
- 35.
Article 1 of Apostille Convention.
- 36.
Ministry of Foreign Affairs, Republic of Korea e-Apostille Service. Available at: http://www.apostille.go.kr. Accessed 20 July 2019.
- 37.
Lee et al. (2017), p. 39.
- 38.
Article 2, subparagraph 2 of Digital Signature Act (Act No. 14839, July 26, 2017).
- 39.
Article 2, subparagraph 3 (a) to (d) of Digital Signature Act.
- 40.
Article 2, subparagraph 1 of the Framework Act on Electronic Documents and Transactions.
- 41.
Article 4, paragraph 1 of the Framework Act on Electronic Documents and Transactions.
- 42.
Article 11 of the Framework Act on Electronic Documents and Transactions.
- 43.
Article 31-7, paragraph 1 of the Framework Act on Electronic Documents and Transactions.
- 44.
Article 31-7, paragraph 2 of the Framework Act on Electronic Documents and Transactions.
- 45.
Article 40 of the Framework Act on Electronic Documents and Transactions.
- 46.
The Hague Conference on Private International Law Permanent Bureau (2013), p. 63, paragraph 270.
- 47.
The Hague Conference on Private International Law Permanent Bureau (2013), p. 64, paragraph 271 (“For a multi-page document, the Apostille should be placed on the signature page of the document. If an allonge is used, this should be affixed to the front or the back of the document (see C&R No 17 of the 2003 SC). For practical reasons, an Apostille should be placed on the underlying public document in a way that does not conceal the matters being certified (e.g., the signature), or any content of the document.”); The Hague Conference on Private International Law Permanent Bureau (2013), p. 64, paragraph 272 (“If attaching the Apostille to a particular document is not practical (or indeed not permitted by the law of its State), the Competent Authority may wish to instruct the applicant to obtain a certified copy of the document to be apostillized instead.”).
- 48.
The Hague Conference on Private International Law Permanent Bureau (2013), p. 64, paragraph 273 (“Competent Authorities should inform applicants that the Apostille must remain attached to the underlying public document. In particular, they should advise applicants wishing to make photocopies of apostillized documents that detaching the Apostille from the underlying public document invalidates the Apostille.”).
- 49.
Lee et al. (2017), at 44.
- 50.
Id.
References
Dong J-S, Kim S-H (2010) Understanding of open source software license. Copyright Culture 194:11
Ehrsam F (2017) Blockchain governance: programming Our future, MEDIUM. https://medium.com/@FEhrsam/blockchain-governance-programming-our-future-c3bfe30f2d74
Galavis J (2019) Blame it on the blockchain: cryptocurrencies boom amidst global regulations. U Miami Int Comp L Rev 26:561
Hammerschmidt C (2017) Consensus in Blockchains. In Short, MEDIUM. https://medium.com/@chrshmmmr/consensus-in-blockchain-systems-in-short-691fc7d1fefe. Accessed 9 Aug 2019
HCCH, HCCH convention of 5 October 1961 abolishing the requirement of legalisation for foreign public documents. Available at https://assets.hcch.net/docs/80d0e86f-7da8-46f8-8164-df046285bcdd.pdf. Accessed 10 Aug 2019
HCCH, Status table: Convention of 5 October 1961 abolishing the requirement of legalisation for foreign public documents. Available at https://www.hcch.net/en/instruments/conventions/status-table/?cid=41. Accessed 10 Aug 2019
LG OpenSource CodeDistribution, http://www.lg.com/global/support/opensource/opensource.jsp. Accessed 10 Jun 2019
Jeffery A (2017) US SEC denies a second application to list Bitcoin product, CNBC. https://www.cnbc.com/2017/03/29/us-sec-denies-a-second-application-to-list-bitcoin-product.html. Accessed 8 Aug 2019
Kasireddy P (2018) ELI5: what do we mean by “blockchains are trustless”? MEDIUM. https://medium.com/@preethikasireddy/eli5-what-do-we-mean-by-blockchains-are-trustless-aa420635d5f6. Accessed 10 Jun 2019
Korea Copyright Commission, Open source SW license information systems. https://www.olis.or.kr/en/LicenseIntroduction.do. Accessed 10 Jun 2019
Lee C-N (2006) Legal implication on software patent on open source software. Admin Law 17(1–2):953–956
Lee C-N (2007) Necessity for patent protection of software. Ind Property Right 23:395
Lee C-N et al (2012) Open source software license guide 2.0 (Intermediate Level) (Ministry of Culture, Sports and Tourism and Korea Copyright Commission)
Lee G (2017) e-Apostille for a better international cooperation, a presentation delivered on July 4, 2017 at International Conference to Take Place to Celebrate 20th Anniversary of ROK’s Accession to Hague Conference on Private International Law (HCCH), HCCH Asia Pacific Week 2017
Lee G et al (2017) A study on standardization of e-Apostilles, Final report submitted by Korea Association of Private International Law to Ministry of Foreign Affairs
Miles C (2017) Blockchain security: what keeps your transaction data safe? IBM. Available at https://www.ibm.com/blogs/blockchain/2017/12/blockchain-security-what-keeps-your-transaction-data-safe/. Accessed on 9 Aug 2019
Ministry of Foreign Affairs, Republic of Korea e-Apostille Service. Available at http://www.apostille.go.kr. Accessed 10 Jun 2019
Offerman A, Open versus closed source: a delicate balance. https://joinup.ec.europa.eu/elibrary/case/open-versus-closed-source-delicate-balance. Accessed 8 Aug 2019
Samsung Open Source Release Center, http://opensource.samsung.com/. Accessed 10 Jun 2019
Sohn H-S (2012) Antitrust aspects of open source commercialization. Informedia Law Rev 15(3):87–114
Sung H-C (2018) When open source software encounters patents: blockchain as an example to explore the dilemma and solutions. J Marshall Rev Intell Prop L 18:55
The Hague Conference on Private International Law Permanent Bureau (2013) A handbook on the practical operation of the Apostille convention (hereinafter “Apostille Handbook”) https://assets.hcch.net/docs/ff5ad106-3573-495b-be94-7d66b7da7721.pdf. Accessed 10 Jun 2019
Wright A, De Filippi A (2015) Decentralized blockchain technology and the rise of lex cryptographia. SSRN 1:27–28
Author information
Authors and Affiliations
Corresponding author
Editor information
Editors and Affiliations
Rights and permissions
Copyright information
© 2020 Springer Nature Singapore Pte Ltd.
About this chapter
Cite this chapter
Lee, G. (2020). Legal Issues Related to Blockchain Technology—Examples from Korea. In: Corrales Compagnucci, M., Forgó, N., Kono, T., Teramoto, S., Vermeulen, E.P.M. (eds) Legal Tech and the New Sharing Economy. Perspectives in Law, Business and Innovation. Springer, Singapore. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-981-15-1350-3_9
Download citation
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/978-981-15-1350-3_9
Publisher Name: Springer, Singapore
Print ISBN: 978-981-15-1349-7
Online ISBN: 978-981-15-1350-3
eBook Packages: Law and CriminologyLaw and Criminology (R0)