Shareholder Suits and Outside Director Liability: The Case of Korea
Why this work is in the frame
A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Reforms to Korean corporate and securities law carried out in the wake of the 1997-1998 East Asian financial crisis included a mandate that boards include a minimum number of outside directors and facilitation of shareholder lawsuits against board members for damages. The strategy of imposing liability risk on directors (both inside and outside) appeared to follow U.S. practice. In the U.S., outside directors of public companies are often sued but rarely face personal, or ut-of-pocket,liability unless they engage in self-dealing. Instead, damages and legal fees are paid by the company, directorsand officers(D&O) insurance, or both. Outside directors of public companies in Australia, Canada, Britain, France, Germany, and Japan similarly rarely face out-of-pocket liability due to shareholder lawsuits. Moreover, when events have occurred in these countries that increase the risk of out-of-pocket liability, there is a strong tendency for political or market forces to reestablish a non-zero but minimal level of risk for actions that do not involve self-dealing. Korea experience seems to be similar. We argue that\n\nKorea could go somewhat further to encourage litigation against outside directors of public companies, but should not open the way for ut of pocketliability to become commonplace.
Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.
Full frame distilled prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
Machine scores (provisional)
The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.
Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it