Samsung Refutes Kim Yong-cheol`s Recent Revelations

Samsung Group released a report to refute Kim Yong-cheol’s fourth revelation and claimed that the conglomerate will release further information if necessary. Samsung also said for the first time since the allegations were made that it will come up with legal countermeasures at the group level. The following is Samsung’s explanation of the major revelations made by Kim.

“Samsung created slush funds through Samsung Corporation”-

“The memorandum for the evidence which was provided by Kim is not expected to prove Samsung’s slush funds since the documents were written in 1994. Former and current workers who signed the document said that there were absolutely no slush funds. Samsung SDI paid cash including an extra charge and all the expenses (money for making samples and test operations).”

“Samsung purchased expensive artwork with slush funds”-

“Leeum Samsung Museum of Art and its director general Hong Ra-hee did not buy either “Bethlehem’s Hospital” or “Happy Tears” from other gallery. The Joongang Daily also announced that the claim that the wife of its chairman had bought tens of billions of won worth of art is groundless.”

“Window dressing settlement and Samil PricewaterhouseCoopers”-

“Attorney Kim alleged that Samsung Electronics provided 40 billion won annually by raising the price of lead frames supplied to it by Samsung Techwin as a window dressing settlement case. Samsung, however, bought lead frames worth a total of 85 billion won at that time, and the allegation that Samsung provided 40 billion won is incomprehensible.”

Samil PricewaterhouseCoopers also supported Samsung, saying that it began auditing Samsung Engineering from this year, and other accounting company had audited it from 2001 to 2006. Samil added that the sale of Samsung Heavy Industries were 3.5 trillion won at the end of 2000, and the allegation that two trillion won, or more than half of the sales amount, was treated as a window dressing settlement cannot be true.

“Unlawful acts of Kim & Chang”-

“Samsung had paid for all pleadings for its requests provided by Kim & Chang, one of the largest law firms in South Korea. Samsung Electronics did not pay several billion won in consultation fees generated from the process of probes for Everland and the trials.”

“Misrepresented property and management”-

“Kim’s allegation that Samsung opened bank accounts under the names of its executives is just his guess. With regard to the allegation, former Samsung Corporation Vice President Ji Seung-lim said to a Dong-A Ilbo reporter in a phone interview that he didn’t possess even one share of Samsung Life and asked Dong-A Ilbo to check the list of Samsung Life’s shareholders for confirmation. Former senior Samsung lawyer Kim had alleged that Ji lent his name so that Samsung can buy shares of Samsung Life.”

“Illegal Destruction of Samsung Motors’ legal management records”-

“Samsung did not destroy related documents, and Samsung sold Samsung Motors to Renault through legal procedures.”

“Samsung managed human networks of major figures of civic groups”-

“The resource on lawyers of the People’s Solidarity for Participatory Democracy provided by Kim is groundless.”

bae2150@donga.com