Stronger ties emerged between South Korea and ASEAN nations at the 8th ASEAN-Republic of Korea Heads of Intellectual Property Offices’ meeting in Seoul September 1-3, 2025. 

The meeting included the Republic of Korea-ASEAN Intellectual Property Symposium, according to a statement from the Korean Intellectual Property Office (KIPO). 

The symposium was organized with the aim of introducing Korea's intellectual property policies to the delegations from ASEAN member states and Korean participants, including the representatives from companies and patent attorneys; and also presenting the insights into ASEAN’s IP systems, dispute resolution mechanisms and market entry strategies, the statement said.  

Wan Ki Kim, commissioner of KIPO, emphasized in his opening address that amid the global spread of protectionism, South Korea and ASEAN are faced by the common challenge of market expansion and diversification. He noted that close cooperation between the two parties in the field of intellectual property to foster an innovation-driven growth, facilitate technology transactions and transfers and establish a fair market order could bring in shared benefits. 

It was followed by the congratulatory remarks from Suon Vichea, advisor to the Ministry of Commerce of Cambodia and chair of the ASEAN Working Group on Intellectual Property Cooperation (AWGIPC). The program also featured the presentations by Korean experts on South Korea’s IP utilization and protection policies and case studies, by ASEAN representatives on their IP systems, and by the director of KIPO’s Overseas IP Center in Ho Chi Minh City on IP strategies for entering the ASEAN market. 

Alongside the symposium, an exhibition showcasing anti-counterfeiting technologies developed by Korean companies was also held. Products incorporating security technologies such as holograms, watermarks, and authenticity labels were displayed, while services integrating information technology with security solutions for use in corporate marketing and distribution management were also demonstrated to both ASEAN and domestic participants. 

KIPO also held bilateral meetings with eight ASEAN member states on the sidelines of the meeting. The delegations had an in-depth discussion on the topics of mutual interest that ranged from IP protection, IP finance to SME support, as well as on the ongoing and future bilateral cooperation. 

With Singapore, KIPO signed a revised memorandum of understanding for reinforced cooperation, adding new areas of collaboration, such as information exchange on artificial intelligence, IP finance, and valuation, to the existing areas of cooperation on capacity building, commercialization, and user outreach (industry, academia, and research institutions), according to a KIPO statement.  

With Vietnam, Indonesia, and Cambodia, KIPO established respective work plans to implement cooperation in five key areas: IP laws and systems, training, protection, trademarks, and awareness raising. In particular, the statement said, the “protection” agenda included sharing best practices in protection and enforcement, conducting joint crackdowns on online and offline counterfeit distribution, carrying out comparative research on protection legislation, and information exchange to prevent bad-faith trademark filings. 

As South Korea continues to expand its influence in the IP sphere, we turned to IP professionals in the region in order to understand better what clients are looking for from today’s outside IP lawyer. Asia IP asked a large number of professionals – mostly in-house counsel and corporate legal managers – what they were looking for from their legal service providers. From their answers, we have compiled our list of South Korea’s 60 IP Experts, those lawyers who understand just what their clients need and are able to provide them with the best practical advice.  

Top-notch individuals are increasingly easy to come by in Seoul, and the legal market is seeing a transformation from a small handful of old-school, very established firms dominating the market to a larger number of firms for legal departments to choose from.  

Kim & Chang and the NAM IP Group led our rankings, each with five lawyers on the list. Two firms were nipping at their heels with four lawyers each on the list: Bae, Kim & Lee and Lee International IP & Law Group. 

FirstLaw; Lee & Ko; Y.P. Lee, Mock & Partners; and Yulchon each placed three lawyers on the list, while a host of firms had two each: E.M. Hwang & Partners; Jipyong; KBK & Associates; Muhann Patent & Law Firm; PI IP Law; Shin & Kim; Yoon & Lee International Patent & Law Firm; and You Me Patent & Law Firm. 

Fourteen different firms each placed one lawyer on our list, accounting for nearly one-quarter of all lawyers named. 

Most of the lawyers named to our list have multiple practice specialties. Many of them are litigators, while others concentrate on prosecution work or provide strategic advice.  

All of them have something in common: they are experts in their fields and, in one way or another, they provide extra value for their clients. They are Asia IP’s South Korea IP Experts.
– GREGORY GLASS 

South Korea’s IP Experts is based solely on independent editorial research conducted by Asia IP. As part of this project, we turned to in-house counsel in South Korea, Asia and elsewhere around the world, as well as Asia-focused partners at international law firms, and asked them to nominate private-practice lawyers including foreign legal consultants, advisers and counsel.  

The final list reflects the nominations received combined with the input of the editorial team at Asia IP, which has more than 50 years of collective experience in researching and understanding South Korea’s legal market. 

All private practice intellectual property lawyers in South Korea were eligible for inclusion in the nominations process; there were no fees or other requirements for inclusion in the process. 

The names of our 60 IP Experts are published here. Each IP Expert was given the opportunity to include their biography and contact details in print and on our website, for which a fee was charged.