The most active parties in the South Korean acquisition finance market have been local commercial banks and domestic securities companies on the lender side. International banks are fairly inactive in the Korean acquisition finance market for the following reasons:

• firstly, the acquisition price is usually paid in the Korean currency, Won, and therefore loans extended for the purpose of financing acquisitions are usually made in Korean Won; and
• secondly, loans taken out by Korean companies from non-resident lenders are subject to Korean withholding tax in relation to interest payments and foreign exchange reporting requirements.

It is worth noting that, in the last two to three years, private credit funds (both foreign and domestic) have come to play a more active role.

In terms of foreign credit funds, despite their disadvantages vis-à-vis local financings noted above, as local commercial banks and securities houses could not fully service the needs of local borrowers – owing, for example, to the tightening of their lending criteria and the constrained liquidity in the acquisition financing market – such foreign credit funds were able to fill the gap in a number of transactions, since their more flexible lending criteria allowed for financings where more traditional players could not lend.

Domestic private equity funds were previously restricted from investing in loan products under the FSCMA, but since the FSCMA underwent amendment in the second half of 2021 to permit such investment, the number of deals in which local credit funds have participated as lenders has steadily increased.

Traditionally, corporate purchasers have mostly financed their acquisitions by issuing bonds or obtaining bank loans, in each case relying on their own credits. It was not until private equity funds became active in the Korean M&A market that the leveraged buyout structure became widely used for acquisitions.

Corporate purchasers continue to rely primarily on the issue of equity, bonds or bank debt (on their own credit), while private equity funds actively seek financing from domestic banks and domestic securities companies.

The governing law of the loan documents is almost always Korean law.

Typically, the loan documentation is drafted by the lender’s legal counsel. No particular standardised forms are used (eg, the Loan Syndications and Trading Association standard provisions or Loan Market Association templates are not typically used). The law firm acting as counsel to the lenders uses its own templates for producing the loan documents. However, the contents of the loan documents used in the Korean acquisition finance market do not differ materially from those governed by the laws of England and Wales or the State of New York.

Loan documents are usually written and negotiated in Korean, though they can be prepared in English in cases where the sponsor is a non-Korean entity.

Similar to other financing transactions, a legal opinion in an acquisition finance transaction will cover:

• whether the borrower is validly existing under the laws in which it has been incorporated; and
• whether the financing documents have been duly authorised and executed, and are legal, valid and binding upon the borrower pursuant to the terms of such documents.

In addition, lenders would typically want their counsel to opine on the following:

• whether the financing documents contravene the borrower’s constitutional documents or any applicable laws or regulations of Korea;
• whether the financing documents need to be filed, registered or recorded in any public office to ensure the validity or enforceability of the obligations of the borrower under the financing documents;
• whether any required consents, authorisations, approvals, filings (including foreign exchange report filings) have been made or are not necessary for the borrower’s performance under the financing documents; and
• whether there are any stamp, registration, documentary or similar taxes, duties, assessments or governmental charges payable in respect of the financing documents.

A typical debt financing structure involves extending senior loans to a newly formed company that acts as the acquiring vehicle. In larger deals, mezzanine financing in the form of mezzanine loans or redeemable shares is often used. At syndication, most investors participating in the senior loan also participate in the mezzanine loan. A secondary market for subordinated bond/high-yield debt is not active in Korea.

The senior loan amount is usually around 50% of the total acquisition cost, which may be adjusted based on the target’s earnings before interest, taxes, depreciation and amortisation (EBITDA). Senior loans usually consist of one or more term-loan facilities and a revolving facility. The purpose of the term-loan facilities is to pay the acquisition cost together with the equity investment amount, and the purpose of the revolving facility is usually to pay the financing cost and other working capital requirements.

The bullet repayment of the senior loans on the final repayment date is most common. The term of the senior loans is usually four to five years. A prepayment fee is usually charged on the voluntary prepayment of the term-loan facility within 12 to 18 months from the closing date.

Mezzanine loans are usually term-loan facilities for paying a portion of the acquisition cost. As previously discussed, since the investors participating in the senior loans and mezzanine loans are usually the same or a similar group of financial institutions, the length of the mezzanine loan may often be the same as the senior loan, with the same security package given to the senior lenders provided in favour of the mezzanine lenders.

Furthermore, the documentation for mezzanine loans is often similar to those for senior loans (although certain financial covenants or events of default are more lenient than for senior loans). Also, the upfront fee, interest rates and prepayment charges are usually higher for the mezzanine loans than those for senior loans.

Payment-in-kind (PIK) interest for mezzanine loans is quite common in the Korean acquisition finance market.

Bridge loans are often used for the acquisition of shares in a listed target. For a public tender offer, the offeror must submit documents evidencing that it has the funds available to complete the tender offer (such as a certificate of deposit balance or a commitment letter issued by a domestic financial institution) to the FSC at the time of filing the tender offer statement. Bridge loans (secured by a pledge over the account on which the loan is funded) are often used to finance the transaction. If the tender offer is successful, the bridge loan is paid from the proceeds of the main debt financing and equity investments. Conversely, if the tender offer is unsuccessful, the bridge loan is simply repaid from the proceeds deposited in the pledged account. A bridge loan is usually provided by one lender, for the following reasons:

• confidentiality is a crucial factor in these types of transactions; and
• the offeror generally prefers to deal only with one lender.

Corporate purchasers have mostly financed their acquisitions by issuing bonds or bank loans, but otherwise a secondary market for subordinated bond/high-yield debt is not active in Korea.

When corporate purchasers finance their acquisitions by issuing bonds, this takes the form of private placement, as opposed to public offering. In the Korean acquisition financing market, there is no such legal form as loan notes.

Typically, for a share deal where the purchaser acquires the shares in a target company, the purchaser will set up a special purpose vehicle (SPV) for the acquisition, and will inject capital and raise debt from third-party lenders through that vehicle to fund the acquisition. The SPV will have no assets to provide as security to the lenders other than the shares of the target company that it intends to acquire.

As further discussed in 5. Security, assets of the target company cannot be provided as security because of a potential breach of fiduciary duty by the target company’s directors under Korean law. However, corporate purchasers that do not utilise a separate SPV, or purchasers that directly acquire certain assets or businesses of a target company (rather than acquiring the shares of the target company), may choose to provide their own assets or the acquired assets to secure the debt that they raise for the acquisition.

The contents of the intercreditor agreement used in the Korean acquisition finance market do not differ materially from those governed by the laws of England and Wales or the State of New York, though the forms are relatively simpler.

The usual arrangement in Korea is to first pay off the senior loan in full before payment of the mezzanine loan. Most commonly, the interest on the senior loan is paid in cash on a quarterly basis. In the case of a mezzanine loan, a recent market trend is for:

• the interest at a lower coupon rate to be paid in cash on a quarterly basis; and
• the yield to maturity accrued on a compound basis to be paid on the final maturity date.

When a corporate purchaser issues bonds, they are unsecured corporate bonds and the bond investors do not receive any security. Therefore, bond investors are rarely a party to an intercreditor agreement.

It is very rare for a hedge counterparty to be a creditor in a Korean acquisition-financing transaction. Therefore, hedge counterparties are rarely a party to an intercreditor agreement.

A general charge or assignment over all assets of a party is not acknowledged in Korea. Therefore, a separate security interest should be created in relation to each type of asset. The main types of security interest are as follows.

Statutory Mortgage

This is a statutory form of security interest. Since mortgages provide secured creditors with priority over subsequent creditors and purchasers of the relevant property, mortgages are generally preferred by creditors. Mortgages can only be created over registrable property, which are types of property that require title to be registered with appropriate judicial and governmental authorities (such as real property, aircraft, automobiles, and certain categories of ships and heavy equipment – but not intellectual property rights).

The most common form of mortgage is a kun-mortgage used for establishing security interests in real property. A kun-mortgage requires only that a maximum secured amount be specified when recording the kun-mortgage with the court registry (the actual secured amount can vary over time due to the accrual of interest or otherwise). The actual secured amount of a kun-mortgage, therefore, does not need to be provided when the kun-mortgage is recorded with the court registry, as long as the maximum secured amount is stipulated.

For the registration process, the mortgagor would typically prepare and submit a mortgage application form with the mortgage agreement entered into between the mortgagor and the mortgagee. Depending on the workload of the court registry office, it could take between three and five business days after submitting the mortgage registration application for the relevant court registry office to complete the mortgage registration. Once the kun-mortgage is registered, no periodic filing is required to maintain the perfection of the mortgage over time.

Title Transfer by Way of Security (Yangdo Dambo)

Unlike a mortgage, yangdo dambo is not a statutory security interest, but rather is a contractual security arrangement that the Korean courts have come to recognise over time. Security interest over receivables, monetary claims and certain movable assets (such as inventory) are generally granted in the form of yangdo dambo. Yangdo dambo is particularly useful when the collateral (eg, inventory) cannot be physically delivered to the secured party. Under Korean law, while a pledge over the collateral requires physical delivery of the property, yangdo dambo is valid even in cases where the transferred property (the collateral) remains with its transferor (the security provider), provided the transferor acknowledges that it is holding the property on behalf of the transferee (the secured party).

Pledge (Jil-kwon)

A pledge is created by the parties entering into a pledge agreement. The pledge requires the collateral provider to surrender possession of the collateral to the secured party, but permits the debtor to retain title to the collateral, with certain exceptions. If specifically agreed between the secured party and the collateral provider, the secured party may be able to resort to a private sale or direct acquisition of title to the collateral in addition to the judicial foreclosure. A pledge is typically created over intellectual property rights, monetary claims (such as a claim over an amount on deposit in bank deposit accounts), shares and bonds.

Shares

Under the Act on Electronic Registration of Stocks, Bonds, etc of Korea, all listed companies are required to issue their shares in electronic form instead of physical share certificates. The issuer will need to register all of its shares with an electronic registration institution (the Korea Securities Depository (KSD)), and the shareholders will have their own share custody account opened at their respective account management company (which shall be a bank, securities company or other licensed financial institution authorised under the aforementioned Act). Non-listed companies may choose to register their shares electronically or keep them in physical form.

For shares represented by physical share certificates, a pledge is created and perfected by the delivery of the relevant share certificates, on which the name of the pledgee is endorsed by the pledgor, to the pledgee. To perfect the pledge against the company issuing the shares, the name and address of the pledgee must be registered with the shareholders′ registry of the company.

For shares existing in electronic form, the pledgor must submit an application to its account management company for the creation of the share pledge. The share pledge is created and perfected when the pledgor delivers to the pledgee a copy of the ledger of its share custody account, which records the pledge and the name of the pledgee.

Inventory

Korean law generally requires assets subject to a security interest to be specifically identifiable. Therefore, under Korean law, a valid security interest cannot be granted over a fluctuating pool of assets where each asset within the pool is not specifically identified. However, certain exceptions have been recognised by courts (eg, a valid security interest can be granted in inventories stored in a segregated storage facility).

Bank Accounts

A bank deposit is considered the depositor’s claim against the depository bank. The pledge of a claim can be perfected against third parties in the same way as for monetary claims. The bank′s deposit agreement will usually prohibit a pledge from a bank account without the bank′s consent, which means that consent from the depository bank is required (and should be fixed-date-stamped).

Monetary Claims

In order to perfect a pledge or yangdo dambo over monetary claims (such as receivables) against any third party (including the underlying obligor), the security provider must either:

• deliver a notice of pledge (or assignment) to the underlying obligor with a fixed-date stamp affixed to it (eg, a notice to the debtor by contents-certified mail, via a post office in Korea); or
• obtain a written consent to the pledge (or assignment) with a fixed-date stamp affixed to it.

If there is a contractual restriction on the assignment or creation of a security interest in the underlying contract, the security provider must obtain the underlying obligor′s consent to the pledge (or assignment) with a fixed-date stamp affixed. In addition, any instruments relating to the monetary claim should be delivered to the secured party.

In relation to the effectiveness of the security interest over future monetary claims, the following elements are required for the valid creation of the security interest over monetary claims to be generated in the future (based on the views of leading commentators and precedents from the Korean Supreme Court):

• the monetary claims can be reasonably identified and specified; and
• the monetary claims are likely to be generated in the near future.

Intellectual Property Rights

For the creation of a pledge over a trade mark, patent or any other intellectual property rights, the pledge must be registered with the Korea Industrial Property Office (KIPO).

The KIPO registration fees must be paid. The relevant fees and expenses depend on the number of intellectual property rights subject to the pledge. It usually takes two weeks from the date of submitting the application to the KIPO to complete the registration of the pledge.

Real Property

The most popular forms of security granted over real property are the following.

Mortgage

This must be registered with the appropriate court registry. Registration and education taxes must be paid and national housing bonds purchased for a mortgage to be registered. Taxes and expenses depend on the maximum mortgage amount. A mortgage is automatically perfected on creation, and no further action is required for perfection. One particular form of mortgage used for taking a blanket security interest over a factory is a “factory mortgage”. This creates a security interest in the factory′s underlying land, facilities, fixtures and equipment. Recording a factory mortgage with the court registry requires the attachment of a schedule, which lists specific items covered by the factory mortgage.

Collateral trust

A security interest over real property can be created using a collateral trust (often favoured by the lenders). The property owner as trustor enters into a real property collateral agreement with a trustee, and the trustee issues a beneficiary certificate to the lender as the primary beneficiary. Title to the property is then transferred to the trustee. On the occurrence of an event of default under the loan agreement, the lender can instruct the trustee to dispose of the property.

The key difference between a collateral trust and a mortgage is the method under which the collateral property can be disposed of. In a collateral trust, the trustee can sell the property through a private sale. In a mortgage, however, the disposal of the property can only be carried out under a court-administered auction process, which can take a significant amount of time, and may or may not result in the optimal amount of sale proceeds.

An advantage of the collateral trust arrangement is that it is easier to administer, as the sale proceeds are distributed in accordance with the waterfall set out in the trust agreement. However, the kun-mortgage has the advantage that the purchaser can take over the property from the foreclosure auction, free of all liens (subject to exceptions of the super-senior liens).

Movable Assets

Security interests over movable assets can be created using either a pledge or yangdo dambo. To create yangdo dambo over movable assets (that are not registrable property), the parties (ie, the assignor and the assignee) must agree to:

• transfer title of the movable assets to the assignee; and
• allow the assignor to maintain physical possession and continued use of the inventory while holding it “in trust” for the assignee (which constitutes the delivery of the movable assets to the assignee under Article 189 of the Korean Civil Code).

There are no particular form requirements regarding security, as long as the requirements for the creation and perfection of security under Korean law are complied with.

For the registration process of a mortgage, see 5.1 Types of Security Commonly Used.

An upstream security raises a potential breach-of-fiduciary-duty issue under Korean law for the security provider’s directors. Korean court precedents generally do not recognise a justifiable corporate benefit where a Korean subsidiary provides an upstream security to its parent company. Any benefit that the entire company group receives from the upstream security is treated separately from the corporate benefit given to the Korean subsidiary providing the security.

However, it is up to the directors of the Korean subsidiary to determine whether the Korean subsidiary, in fact, enjoys a corporate benefit by providing the security, after taking into account the circumstances in their entirety. This is a factual analysis, and a board resolution simply acknowledging that the security provides a corporate benefit would not automatically prove the existence of a justifiable corporate benefit to the Korean subsidiary providing the security.

There is no explicit financial assistance rule in Korea. However, all actions taken by the directors of the company providing financial assistance must comply with the relevant fiduciary duty restrictions. Under Korean law, the directors can be subject to civil and criminal liability for breach of fiduciary duty if they act with the intent to benefit a particular third party.

In this context, a third party includes the shareholders of the company, since the prevailing view is that the fiduciary duty of directors runs to the company itself rather than to the shareholders of the company. Therefore, the directors of the target that support the provision of guarantees (or provide the assets of the target as collateral) with respect to the obligations of the target’s parent could potentially be subject to both civil and criminal liability.

There are no other known restrictions besides those set forth in the previous sections.

Due to restrictions on providing an upstream security, as previously discussed, the shares of the acquired company being held by the borrower/purchaser is the most common security provided to lenders.

Under Korean law, the pledge over the Korean securities may be enforced by any of the following methods. However, judicial foreclosure is the only method permissible under Korean law, unless there is a separate agreement between the pledgor (ie, the borrower/purchaser) and the pledgee (ie, the lender) specifying the other two methods:

• judicial foreclosure – an auction or a simplified judicial sale of the pledged shares;
• private sale – sale of the pledged shares while the title to the pledged shares remains with the pledgor; and
• acquisition – acquiring title to the pledged shares by a pledgee, either for purposes of disposition or for settlement on the basis of the reasonable value of the pledged shares.

Upon the pledgor’s default, a pledgee shall be able to enforce the pledge over the pledged shares by opting for any of the methods listed above.

Typically, guarantees will be in the form of a demand guarantee, whereby the beneficiary may seek the guarantor’s performance by written demand and without first having to pursue the borrower. Where the guarantee is governed by Korean law and comprehensively guarantees a debtor’s obligation to certain creditors (ie, the guarantee is not limited to a specific transaction), the Civil Code of Korea requires the guarantee to set a maximum guarantee amount, so that the guarantor is aware of the amount of liability it is guaranteeing.

Similar to the provision of upstream security, an upstream guarantee raises a potential breach-of-fiduciary-duty issue under Korean law for the guarantor’s directors. Korean court precedents generally do not recognise a justifiable corporate benefit if a Korean subsidiary provides an upstream guarantee to its parent company. Any benefit that the entire company group receives from the upstream guarantee is treated separately from the corporate benefit given to the Korean subsidiary providing the guarantee.

However, whether the Korean subsidiary in fact enjoys a corporate benefit by providing the guarantee is to be determined by the directors of the Korean subsidiary, taking into account the circumstances in their entirety. This is a factual analysis, and a board resolution simply acknowledging that the guarantee provides a corporate benefit would not automatically prove the existence of a justifiable corporate benefit to the Korean guarantor.

There is no requirement for guarantee fees, although paying guarantee fees would support the argument that there is a corporate benefit to the guarantor for providing the guarantee.

There is no specific provision for or concept of equitable subordination rules in Korea.

With respect to claw-back risk, under Korean insolvency law, payments or other acts (such as granting security interest or sale of assets) performed by the borrower may be avoided by the insolvency official after the commencement of insolvency proceedings if, in general, they fall into one of the following four categories:

• malicious payments or acts with the actual intent to harm the creditors;
• any act detrimental to the creditors after suspension of payment or filing for insolvency proceedings;
• a payment for an obligation or granting of a security interest without the pre-existing obligation to do so if such an act was made after, or within 60 days before, suspension of payment or filing for insolvency proceedings (the suspect period will be extended from 60 days to one year if a specially related party is the counterparty of that act); and
• any gratuitous act performed after, or within six months before, the suspension of payment or filing for insolvency proceedings (that six-month period will be extended to one year if a specially related party is the counterparty of that act).

In the context of acquisition finance, the application of claw-back rules is not generally seen, but the above principles may apply, depending on facts and circumstances.

Under Korean law, a stamp tax of KRW350,000 would apply to any loan agreement executed in Korea under which a lender agrees to lend KRW1 billion (approximately USD822,000) or more.

Payment of interest by a Korean borrower to a foreign lender would be subject to withholding tax under the Korean tax code. The withholding tax rate will be the lesser of 22% (which includes local income tax) or whatever rate is applicable under the tax treaty between Korea and the country of tax residence of the foreign lender. In the Korean acquisition finance market, the qualifying lender concept will often apply, to avoid any grossing-up of withholding tax.

The deductibility of interest payments in relation to a loan extended by a foreign controlling shareholder (FCS) of the Korean borrower may be restricted under the International Tax Co-ordination Law of Korea. If the amount of the Korean borrower’s debt owed to an FCS or to a third party under a guarantee issued by an FCS exceeds 200% (600% if the Korean borrower engages in finance business) of the “net FCS equity” in the Korean borrower, interest expenses on the excessive debt are not deductible to the Korean borrower for corporate income tax purposes. In addition, the non-deductible interest amount is treated as dividends if the debt is owed to an FCS.

An FCS is a foreign shareholder who either:

• directly or indirectly owns 50% or more of the voting power in the borrower; or
• substantially controls the business policies of the borrower.

Factors indicating control include (among others):

• interlocking directors;
• significant financial support;
• business dependency; and
• licensing of intangible property.

The “net FCS equity” in the borrower for this purpose is defined as its proportionate share of the larger of:

• the net equity (total assets minus total liabilities) amount of the company; and
• the shareholder’s investment amount (paid-in capital, plus share premium, plus gain from capital reduction, minus discount from capital increase, minus loss from capital reduction) as of the end of the fiscal year.

However, if there is any capital increase or capital reduction during the fiscal year, the new FCS equity should be calculated under the average basis. Accordingly, a thin-capitalisation problem cannot be avoided by:

• extinguishing loans just before the end of the fiscal year; or 
• an injection of additional capital immediately before the end of the fiscal year.

The key regulated industries in Korea include institutions for which applicable laws impose restrictions on the eligibility of major shareholders and/or changes to the composition of the shareholders. These institutions include:

• commercial banks;
• insurance companies;
• securities companies;
• public broadcast companies; and
• telecommunications companies.

The Bank Act prohibits any one person from acquiring more than 10% of outstanding voting shares of any commercial bank (including any shares held by any specially related persons of that person) unless either approval is obtained from the Financial Services Commission (FSC) or some other limited exception under the Bank Act is applicable.

In addition, if any person acquires more than 4% of the voting shares of any commercial bank, this person must file various reports regarding their acquisition of the interests with the FSC. The FSC’s approval is also necessary for a person to become a major shareholder of insurance companies, securities companies, mutual savings banks or other financial institutions.

Various restrictions are also imposed on the following.

• The eligibility of shareholders for broadcasting companies governed by the Broadcasting Act or the Telecommunications Business Act. The acquisition of any controlling interests in a broadcasting company also requires the approval of the Korea Communications Commission.
• The eligibility of shareholders for telecommunications companies governed by the Telecommunications Business Act. The aggregate amount of shares held by foreigners in any given telecommunications company must not exceed 49% of the total number of outstanding shares.

The acquisition of a listed target company must comply with the special provisions under the Financial Investment Services and Capital Markets Act (FSCMA). Acquisitions of listed target companies are usually conducted by purchasing the shares from the controlling shareholders over the counter. This is done to circumvent the various restrictions under the FSCMA (except for certain disclosure requirements) in relation to the sale and purchase of listed shares.

However, where the number of sellers exceeds ten, the public tender offer procedure must be used. Further, if the seller shareholder is a foreigner, the shares held by the seller should have been acquired as “foreigner investment” under Korea’s Foreigner Investment Promotion Law. Otherwise, the shares held by the foreign seller cannot be sold over the counter without the approval of the FSC.

If there are no controlling shareholders in the listed target, a public tender offer under the FSCMA can be used to acquire the controlling shares. For a public tender offer, the offeror must submit an application to the FSC and the Korea Exchange containing certain information regarding:

• the identity of the offeror and the target;
• the purpose of the tender offer;
• the types and number of shares to be purchased;
• key terms (duration, price, execution date and so on); and
• the funding plan for payment.

Under the FSCMA, before launching a tender offer, the offeror must submit to the FSC evidence that it has the funds necessary to satisfy a full acceptance of its offer. In general, a certificate of deposit balance is submitted as the proof of funds. It is also possible to submit a debt commitment letter issued by a domestic financial institution, a letter of capital commitment issued by certain qualifying domestic LPs (namely limited partners to private equity funds which are domestic institutions of requisite reliability such as pension funds, mutual aid associations and financial institutions), or other certificates evidencing the actual holding of funds. However, since the financial supervisory authority has considerable discretion in determining whether something other than a certificate of deposit balance (showing the actual holding of funds) constitutes a sufficient proof of funds, it is strongly advisable to communicate and consult with the financial supervisory authority sufficiently in advance in relation to the details of the offer and the proposed evidence (eg, the amount of the tender offer which will be covered by a debt financing commitment and the identity of the issuer of the commitment letter).

Other than as previously discussed throughout this chapter of the guide, there are no particular issues or considerations regarding acquisition financing in Korea.