evidoria

← Back to browse

Good practice Imported

South Korea's Capital Markets Act Amendment — A Sanction-Free Mandate for One Female Director

South Korea · Seoul · See the South Korea profile · See the Seoul profile

Evidence: Observational / pre–post Top 29% 82/100 · Ask Evidence Copilot about this practice

South Korea's 2020 Capital Markets Act amendment bars listed companies worth 2 trillion+ KRW from having all-male boards. Companies with a female director rose from 37 to 62 within a year, though the law carries no legal sanction for non-compliance.

37 -> 62
Covered companies with a female director (Dec 2019 - Dec 2020)
68 of 168 (46%)
Covered companies with zero female directors (Q3 2021)
South Korea's Capital Markets Act Amendment — A Sanction-Free Mandate for One Female Director

Details

Maturity
Established
Promoter
Financial Services Commission (Republic of Korea)
Period
2020-2022
Keywords
capital markets regulation, corporate governance, gender equality

Context

On 9 January 2020, Korea's National Assembly passed an amendment to the Financial Investment Services and Capital Markets Act barring listed companies with total assets of KRW 2 trillion or more from having single-gender boards, taking effect in August 2020 with a two-year grace period.

Results

The number of covered companies with at least one female director rose from 37 (December 2019) to 62 (December 2020). Still, as late as Q3 2021, 68 of the 168 covered companies (46%) had no female board member at all, a year ahead of the August 2022 compliance deadline.

Conclusions

The final bill dropped disclosure and sanction provisions; compliance pressure instead comes from institutional-investor voting policies and proxy advisors. Because the rule requires only a single director and carries no statutory penalty, legal commentators frame it as a floor rather than a genuine parity measure.

Implementation
Indicative cost
Low (< €50k)
Time to results
Medium (1–3 years)

Commonly funded by

National / regional programmes

Indicative funding routes for practices of this type — always check each programme's current calls and eligibility rules.

Do you run this practice? Claim it — verified implementers get a public contact pathway and can propose corrections.

Data sources

Where this practice's information was retrieved from, and when.

Attachments

Similar practices you may find useful