Reports are surfacing that Samsung Electronics and SK Hynix are ‘coordinating’ with the government to build semiconductor front-end (FAB) production lines in the Honam region, estimated at the scale of hundreds of trillions of won. [Photo=Yonhap News]

Reports are surfacing that Samsung Electronics and SK Hynix are ‘coordinating’ with the government to build semiconductor front-end (FAB) production lines in the Honam region, estimated at the scale of hundreds of trillions of won.

The Blue House has stated that the plan is in the “final stages,” and it is reported that the President has held a series of meetings with the heads of major corporate groups. We cannot help but express deep concern over the current situation, where the location of a core infrastructure industry—which will serve as a national pillar for the next century—is effectively being decided through private meetings initiated by the President with corporate heads, without expert review, public discourse, or institutional and procedural verification.

Political power arbitrarily deciding and interfering with the location and scale of corporate investment is a grave infringement upon the freedom of corporate management guaranteed by the Constitution. The freedom of occupation under Article 15, property rights under Article 23, and the market economic order under Article 119, Paragraph 1 of the Constitution fundamentally guarantee that companies are free to decide for themselves when, where, and how much to invest.

In particular, given the unique context of South Korea, where a company’s competitiveness is directly linked to talent acquisition and national competitiveness, violations of the principle of freedom of corporate management have historically served as significant grounds for the impeachment of a President.

Former President Park Geun-hye was found to have committed an impeachable act by ordering the establishment of the Mir and K-Sports foundations and using the Federation of Korean Industries (FKI) as a conduit to pressure major corporations like Samsung and SK to contribute tens of billions of won. This was recognized as an abuse of the President’s status and influence to infringe upon the property rights and management freedom of those companies without legal basis.

If that is the case, the President’s attempt to directly summon corporate heads to coordinate on their core management decisions is likewise an unjust act and a violation of the Constitution.

In particular, because the scale here reaches hundreds of trillions of won rather than tens of billions, and the matter involves not a one-time donation but the location of core production facilities that determine the fate of these companies, the weight of this issue on corporate management and the national economy is incomparable to that of the sports foundation case.

Even if the status of Samsung and SK necessitated some degree of public consultation, these are not matters to be decided privately by the President meeting with corporate heads.

If a matter is of such gravity to the national economy that it requires consideration of the public interest, it should be discussed in a public forum, where the professional management decisions of the companies involved must be given top priority.

If core corporate management decisions—such as investment and site selection—are unilaterally made following a predetermined political conclusion reached through ‘private presidential meetings’ without such procedures, the constitutional validity of this exercise of power is inevitably brought into question. We wonder how this administration intends to take responsibility for the consequences.

The decision regarding site selection and investment made through the newly announced private meetings between the President and corporate heads must be immediately scrapped, whether viewed from a constitutional or national economic perspective. If such discussions are necessary for the national economy, the entire process must be made transparent to the public.

We strongly urge the government to cease the de facto coercion and political pressure placed on corporate decision-making and to fully respect the freedom of corporate management guaranteed by the Constitution. If a specific political power begins to prey upon the national economy, the nation has no future.

June 26, 2026 

Lawyers for Human Rights and Unification of Korea 

President Lee Jae-won