The “LY Corporation incident,” triggered by Japanese government intervention, has become increasingly complex. As a major co-shareholder of LY Corp., Naver has been pressured by Japan to divest its shares, while parties like the Democratic Party of Korea have initiated anti-Japanese campaigns. In response, the South Korean government belatedly announced a policy of “firm response,” with the presidential office also referring to a “strict response.”
The primary responsibility lies with the Japanese government. Demanding a “review of capital relations” over a personal information leak is an excessive interference in corporate management. Based on this, entities such as SoftBank pressured Naver to sell its shares and dismissed a South Korean director from the board of LY. Japan’s public and private sectors have collaborated in this effort to push out Naver.
In South Korea, the government, businesses, and political parties take different stances. Naver’s behavior has been particularly peculiar, as it has not clearly stated its position and has maintained a vague attitude. Naver has also been passive in communicating with our government. Although it must consider the Japanese government, its reluctance to share information with the South Korean government has significantly exacerbated the situation.
It appears that the government initially misjudged the situation. Some analyses suggest that the government neglected the issue, fearing damage to the publicly touted South Korea-Japan relations. The Ministry of Foreign Affairs even criticized media outlets that reported the incident. As the situation escalated, the Ministry of Science and Technology criticized Japan, which gave the Democratic Party of Korea and others an opportunity to engage in anti-Japanese rhetoric.
The fundamental premise for resolving the LY situation is that South Korean companies should not suffer harm. Naver reportedly finds selling its shares inevitable and is negotiating the sale with SoftBank. If shares are to be sold, they should be sold under the best conditions, and the proceeds should be reinvested more effectively. In this case, Naver must share accurate details with the government and operate a communication system.
The issue is not merely a private company matter. It involves discrimination against our companies and potential violations of international trade norms. The government cannot treat this as an isolated company problem. There is no need to request special favors for Naver from Japan, but suffering unfair harm is unacceptable. The government must uphold this principle in its relations with Japan and utilize diplomatic and trade measures accordingly. Politicians stirring up anti-Japanese rhetoric over this issue will not only fail to help resolve the situation but is also the last thing Naver would want.
