In a case that there is a jurisdiction clause  between Hong Kong company and Korean company stipulates that the competent court of the area where the defendant exists has the jurisdiction over the dispute in relation to the agreement, and the defendant Hong Kong company who has used the license in Hong Kong and China argued that it could not perform the minimum performance obligation in Hong Kong and China owing to the defects of the licensed software, the Hong Kong court other than Korean court has the jurisdiction and the reasonable relations to the pending issue. The filing an action by the plaintiff Korean company to the Korean court is illegal and shall be rejected. (Seoul Seobu District Court, February 6, 2009)

The arbitration clause provides that the dispute shall be solved by the arbitration under the arbitration board according to the arbitration act, and in case that a party opposes the arbitration award, the dispute shall be solved by the court judgment is invalid as long as the respondent at the arbitration process denies the existence of arbitration consent between parties and oppose the arbitration process. (Supreme court, November 11, 2004.)