This article was displayed on the ChosunBiz MoneyMove (MM) website at 3:58 p.m. on Jan. 13, 2026.
A damages lawsuit over Ecorbit between the consortium of IMM Private Equity (PE) and IMM Investment, domestic private equity fund (PEF) managers, and Kohlberg Kravis Roberts (KKR) has moved into the stage of international judicial cooperation. Because the special purpose company (SPC) that was the effective party to the Ecorbit equity sale is based overseas, the court is said to have requested judicial cooperation with the United States to serve the complaint and secure evidence.
According to investment banking (IB) industry and according to legal sources on the 13th, the Seoul Central District Court handling the Ecorbit damages suit sent a letter of request to the National Court Administration for overseas judicial cooperation. For a domestic court to request judicial cooperation from a foreign country, related documents, including a letter of request, must be delivered to the relevant country via the National Court Administration and the Ministry of Foreign Affairs.
The targets of judicial cooperation include Easel Holdco I·II L.P., which have registered addresses in New York, United States, and Toronto, Canada. These entities are overseas corporations established by KKR to hold Ecorbit equity and were key parties to the equity sale contract at the time. KKR's global headquarters is also located in Manhattan, New York.
The reason the domestic court requested judicial cooperation from foreign countries appears to be service of the complaint. Defendants in this damages suit include not only TY Holdings and KKR's Korea office but also Easel Holdco. As corporations with registered addresses overseas have become parties to the suit, the move appears aimed at ensuring the effectiveness of any judgment. It is to prevent a potential controversy over "procedural defects" that could arise if the IMM consortium prevails.
Some also say it is to secure evidence related to Ecorbit leachate (contaminated water). That is because internal documents and testimony from related parties may be needed to determine whether KKR was aware in advance of Ecorbit's environmental law violations and whether it intentionally concealed them during due diligence. Judicial cooperation is essential to ensure that testimony from related parties residing overseas carries legal evidentiary weight.
However, due to the complexity of cross-border cooperation procedures, a prolonged trial appears inevitable. Typically, the indirect service method that goes through the National Court Administration and the Ministry of Foreign Affairs can take at least six months to more than a year, depending on the receiving country's acceptance procedures. As a result, the first hearing in this case is expected to be held in the second half of this year.
The dispute erupted after the IMM consortium acquired management control of Ecorbit from Taeyoung Group and KKR in Dec. 2024. Two months after the equity acquisition was completed, a leachate problem exceeding legal standards was found at its subsidiary Ecorbit Green Cheongju. The IMM consortium filed a damages suit worth 100 billion won in Sep. 2024, saying that immediately after acquiring Ecorbit it was hit with a business suspension and had to carry out large-scale repairs, causing massive losses.