telling the newspaper: “The reason I’m being sued is because the beast
roared.” He also wrote an apology letter to Jay Lee, the Samsung heir,
without admitting guilt.
On the same day that the article was published, a month later, Samsung
dropped the civil suit. And when Breen attended his criminal hearing,
Samsung’s representative failed to show.
“As Samsung has withdrawn its civil suit and is not here at present,
there is no real victim and therefore there’s no need to make a ruling,” the
judge told Breen at the hearing.
In 2010 the lawyer and whistleblower Kim Yong-chul published a
bestselling memoir about Samsung called Thinking of Samsung, detailing
what he had witnessed at the company and in the Lee family. Many Korean
newspapers refused to review it, and nearly all refused to carry
advertisements for the book.
“One newspaper reported on its popularity,” reported The New York
Times, “but did not print its title or detail its allegations. It became a best
seller thanks to strong word of mouth on blogs and Twitter.”
The left-wing newspaper Kyunghyang later issued a front-page apology
for rejecting a college professor’s column praising the book and criticizing
Samsung.
“But I wouldn’t say I came out the winner,” Yong-chul told me that day
in his conference room.
“I was unemployable. After all that, I returned to Gwangju, my
hometown, and I opened a bakery,” he told me. “No one would hire me.
Then I got a job as a government auditor.”
—
IT WAS THE CHAIRMAN of Samsung, in fact, who emerged as the winner in
the conflict.
“Mr. Lee’s wisdom and experience are urgently needed,” Samsung’s
communications chief told the newspaper the Hankyoreh. Only with the
vision and guidance of the chairman, he claimed, could Samsung continue
to rise among the ranks of global technology companies.
The executives at Samsung had been hard at work in Lee’s absence. In
2009 they announced a bold new campaign called “Vision 2020.” Some
questioned its feasibility. Samsung planned to hit $400 billion in sales in the