2.0.0.10 true Commitments and Contingencies (Accumulated Other Comprehensive Income) 126 - Disclosure - Commitments and Contingencies true false false false 1 KRW ₩ true false false false Accumulated Other Comprehensive Income us-gaap_StatementEquityComponentsAxis xbrldi http://xbrl.org/2006/xbrldi us-gaap_AccumulatedOtherComprehensiveIncomeMember us-gaap_StatementEquityComponentsAxis explicitMember iso4217_KRW Standard http://www.xbrl.org/2003/iso4217 KRW iso4217 0 2 Commitments and Contingencies 2 us-gaap_CommitmentsAndContingenciesDisclosureTextBlock us-gaap true na duration string No definition available. false false false false false false false false false false false false 1 false false false false 0 0 <div> <table style="BORDER-COLLAPSE: collapse" border="0" cellspacing="0" cellpadding="0" width="100%"> <tr> <td valign="top" width="4%" align="left">19.</td> <td valign="top" align="left">Commitments and Contingencies</td> </tr> </table>   <table style="BORDER-COLLAPSE: collapse" border="0" cellspacing="0" cellpadding="0" width="100%"> <tr> <td valign="top" width="4%" align="left">(a)</td> <td valign="top" align="left">Commitments</td> </tr> </table> Overdraft agreements and credit facility agreement As of December 31, 2009, the Controlling Company has bank overdraft agreements with Woori Bank and other various banks amounting to (Won)49,000 million in aggregate and maintains a line of credit amounting to (Won)200,000 million with Hana Bank. There is no overdrawn balance. Factoring and securitization of accounts receivable The Controlling Company has agreements with Korea Exchange Bank and several other banks for accounts receivable negotiating facilities of up to an aggregate of US$1,830 million in connection with its export sales transactions. As of December 31, 2009, accounts and notes receivable amounting to US$187 million and JPY950 million were transferred, are outstanding, and were recorded as short-term borrowings. The Controlling Company has a credit facility agreement with Shinhan Bank pursuant to which the Controlling Company could negotiate its accounts receivable with Shinhan Bank up to an aggregate of (Won)50,000 million in connection with its domestic sales transactions. As of December 31, 2009, no accounts and notes receivable were outstanding among the accounts and notes receivable sold during 2009. In October 2006, LG Display America, Inc., LG Display Germany GmbH, LG Display Shanghai Co., Ltd. and others entered into a five-year accounts receivable selling program with Standard Chartered Bank, on a revolving basis, of up to US$600 million. The Controlling Company joined this program in April 2007. As of December 31, 2009, there was no outstanding balance of securitized accounts receivable held by third party conduits. Loss recognized on the sale of accounts receivable was (Won)6,053 million in the year ended December 31, 2007 and nil in the years ended December 31, 2008 and 2009. In June 2009, LG Display Singapore Pte. Ltd. (“LGDSG”), a subsidiary of the Controlling Company, entered into an accounts receivable selling program of up to US$250 million with Standard Chartered Bank. In July 2009, LG Display Taiwan Co., Ltd. (“LGDTW”), a subsidiary of the Controlling Company, entered into an accounts receivable selling program of up to US$400 million with Taishin International Bank. In July 2009, LG Display Shenzhen Co., Ltd. (“LGDSZ”) and LG Display Shanghai Co., Ltd. (“LGDSH”), subsidiaries of the Controlling Company, entered into accounts receivable selling programs with Bank of China Limited. These programs with Bank of China Limited do not have specified limits since the programs are only subject to accounts receivable for opened letters of credit. Under the accounts receivable selling programs, the accounts receivable of LGD’s subsidiaries are sold without recourse with no continuing involvements.   Letters of credit As of December 31, 2009, the Controlling Company has agreements with Korea Exchange Bank in relation to the opening of letters of credit up to (Won)20,000 million and US$188.5 million, US$20 million with China Construction Bank, US$100 million with Shinhan Bank, respectively, and JPY11,000 million with Woori Bank. Payment guarantees The Controlling Company receives payment guarantee amounting to US$8.5 million from ABN AMRO Bank relating to value added tax payments in Poland. As of December 31, 2009, the Controlling Company is providing a payment guarantee to a syndicate of banks including Kookmin Bank and Societe Generale in connection with a EUR70 million term loan credit facility of LG Display Poland Sp. zo. o. LG Display Poland Sp. zo. o. is provided with a payment guarantee amounting to PLN180 million by PKO Bank relating to the “Simplified Procedure” (deferral of VAT payment), and the Controlling Company provides payment guarantee to PKO Bank and others in connection with their payment guarantee. In addition, the Controlling Company provides payment guarantees in connection with LG Display Singapore Ltd.’s and others’ term loan credit facilities with aggregate principal amount of US$17 million and related interests. LG Display Japan Co., Ltd. and other subsidiaries have entered into short-term credit facility agreements of up to US$410 million, EUR3.6 million, and JPY3,700 million, respectively, with Mizuho Corporate Bank and other various banks. LG Display Japan Co., Ltd. and other subsidiaries are provided with repayment guarantees from the Bank of Tokyo-Mitsubishi and other various banks amounting to US$13 million, JPY1,300 million and CNY2,158 million, respectively, relating to their local tax payments. License agreements As of December 31, 2009, in relation to its TFT-LCD business, the Controlling Company has technical license agreements with Hitachi Display, Ltd. and others and has a trademark license agreement with LG Corp. Long-term supply agreement In January 2009, the Controlling Company entered into a long-term supply agreement with Apple, Inc. to supply LCD panels for 5 years. In connection with the agreement, the Controlling Company received a long-term prepayment of US$500 million from Apple, Inc., which will offset against future outstanding accounts receivable balances, as well as those arising from the supply of products thereafter.   <table style="BORDER-COLLAPSE: collapse" border="0" cellspacing="0" cellpadding="0" width="100%"> <tr> <td valign="top" width="4%" align="left">(b)</td> <td valign="top" align="left">Contingencies</td> </tr> </table> The Company is involved in several legal proceedings and claims arising in the ordinary course of business. However, except for the ongoing proceedings described below, the Company is not currently involved in any material litigation or other proceedings the outcome of which the Company believes might, individually or taken as a whole, have a material adverse effect on its results of operations or financial condition. Intellectual Property On November 26, 2007, the Controlling Company and Chunghwa Picture Tubes signed a settlement agreement regarding the dismissal of all pending claims and patent agreement, allowing the companies to share patented technology. As part of the settlement, Chunghwa Picture Tubes paid a settlement payment to the Controlling Company in compensation. The settlement involves multiple elements. Since there was no fair value for all of the elements, the Company did not account for each element separately. The settlement payment is included in legal settlement within other income (expense). On December 1, 2006, the Controlling Company filed a complaint in the United States District Court for the District of Delaware against Chi Mei Optoelectronics Corp. and AU Optronics Corp. claiming infringement of patents related to liquid crystal displays and the manufacturing processes for TFT-LCDs. The Controlling Company is seeking among other things monetary damages for past infringement and as injunction against future infringement. On March 8, 2007, AU Optronics Corp. filed a counter-claim against the Controlling Company in the United States District Court for the Western District of Wisconsin for alleged infringement of patents related to the manufacturing processes for TFT-LCDs but the suit was transferred to the United States District Court for the District of Delaware on May 30, 2007. On May 4, 2007, Chi Mei Optoelectronics Corp. filed a counter-claim against the Controlling Company for patent infringement in the United States District Court for the Eastern District of Texas, but the suit was transferred to the United States District court for the District of Delaware on March 31, 2008. The Delaware court bifurcated the trial between AU Optronics Corp. and Chi Mei Optoelectronics Corp. holding the first trial against AU Optronics Corp. on June 2, 2009. Although the Controlling Company had a total of nine patents to be tried and AU Optronics Corp. had a total of seven patents to be tried in the first trial against AU Optronics Corp., the trial was further bifurcated so that only four patents from each side were tried. On February 16, 2010, the Delaware court found that the four AU Optronics Corp. patents were valid and were infringed by the Controlling Company, and on April 30, 2010, the Delaware court further found that the Controlling Company’s four patents were valid but were not infringed by AU Optronics Corp. The Delaware court has yet to issue its finding on damages and thus a final judgment had not yet been rendered. The case is still ongoing and the Controlling Company’s remaining patents as well as AU Optronics Corp.’s remaining patents have yet to be tried. Once all findings by the Delaware court have been issued, the Controlling Company will review all options including appeal.   On April 14, 2006, Positive Technologies, Inc. filed a complaint in the United States District Court for the Eastern District of Texas against, among others, several of the Controlling Company’s customers, including BenQ America Corp., Hitachi America Ltd., Panasonic Corp. of North America, Philips Electronics North America Corp. and Toshiba America, Inc. for alleged infringement of two of its patents relating to LCD displays. In March 2007, the Controlling Company was granted the intervention in the patent infringement case brought by Positive Technologies, Inc. On November 7, 2008, the Controlling Company settled with Positive Technologies, Inc., and the case was dismissed on December 12, 2008 and settlement amount was included in other expense. On February 2, 2007, Anvik Corporation filed a patent infringement case against the Controlling Company, along with other LCD manufacturing companies in the United States District Court for the Southern District of New York, in connection with the usage of photo-masking equipment manufactured by Nikon Corporation. While there is no significant progress on this case in 2009, the Company believes its products do not infringe any patents in suit, and intends to defend vigorously in this matter. On December 15, 2008, O2 Micro International Ltd. and O2 Micro, Inc. (“O2 Micro”) requested the United States International Trade Commission (“ITC”) to commence a Trade Remedy Investigations alleging that the Company, LG Display America, Inc. and others infringed their patents relating to LCD Displays. On August 24, 2009, the Controlling Company and O2 Micro submitted a mutual agreement for the completion of the Trade Remedy Investigation on the Controlling Company to the ITC, and on September 25, 2009, the ITC approved this agreement and closed the investigation on the Controlling Company which did not have any impact on the Company’s financial statements. Although there can be no assurance as to the outcome, the Company’s management does not expect that the outcome in the above legal proceedings and claims, of those which are still ongoing, individually or collectively, will have a material adverse effect on the Company’s financial condition, results of operations or cash flows. Antitrust In December 2006, LGD received notices of investigation by the Korea Fair Trade Commission, the Japan Fair Trade Commission, the U.S. Department of Justice, and the European Commission with respect to possible anti-competitive activities in the TFT-LCD industry. LGD subsequently received similar notices from the Canadian Competition Bureau and the Taiwan Fair Trade Commission. In November 2008, LGD executed an agreement with the U.S. Department of Justice whereby LGD and its subsidiary, LG Display America, Inc., pleaded guilty to a Sherman Antitrust Act violation and agreed to pay a single total fine of US$400 million. In December 2008, the U.S. District Court for the Northern District of California accepted the terms of the plea agreement and entered a judgment against LGD and LG Display America, Inc. and ordered the payment of US$400 million according to the following schedule: US$20 million plus any accrued interest by June 15, 2009, and US$76 million plus any accrued interest by each of June 15, 2010, June 15, 2011, June 15, 2012, June 15, 2013 and December 15, 2013. The agreement resolved all federal criminal charges against LGD and LG Display America, Inc. in the United States in connection with this matter.   On May 27, 2009, the European Commission issued a Statement of Objections (“SO”) regarding alleged anti-competitive activities in the LCD industry. LGD submitted a response to the SO on August 11, 2009, and a hearing before the European Commission was held in September 2009. Similar investigations into possible anti-competitive practices in the LCD industry were announced by the Federal Competition Commission of Mexico in or about July 2009 and by the Secretariat of Economic Law of Brazil in December 2009. In November 2009, the Taiwan Fair Trade Commission terminated its investigation without any finding of violations or levying of fines. After the commencement of the U.S. Department of Justice investigation, a number of class action complaints were filed against LGD and other TFT-LCD panel manufacturers in the United States and Canada alleging violation of respective antitrust laws and related laws. In a series of decisions in 2007 and 2008, the class action lawsuits in the United States were transferred to the Northern District of California for pretrial proceedings (“MDL Proceedings”). On March 28, 2010, the federal district court granted the class certification motion filed by the indirect purchaser plaintiffs, and granted in part and denied in part the class certification motion filed by the direct purchaser plaintiffs. On April 12, 2010, the defendants petitioned to appeal the class certification decisions with the Ninth Circuit Court of Appeals. Class certification in Canada remains pending. In relation to the MDL Proceedings, actions alleging similar antitrust violations were brought separately by individual purchasers, including ATS Claim, LLC, AT&T Corp. and its affiliates, Motorola, Inc., Electrograph Technologies Corp. and its subsidiary and TracFone Wireless Inc. LGD has been vigorously defending the individual actions as well as the class action lawsuits. In February 2007, LGD and certain of its current and former officers and directors were named as defendants in a purported shareholder class action in the U.S. District Court for the Southern District of New York, alleging violation of the U.S. Securities Exchange Act of 1934. In May 2010, the defendants, including LGD, reached an agreement in principle with the class plaintiffs to settle the action, which agreement is subject to customary conditions including court approval. On June 2, 2010, a purported shareholder class action complaint was filed in the U.S. District Court for the Southern District of New York against LG Display and certain of its current and former officers and directors on behalf of purchasers of LG Display securities on the Korea Stock Exchange. This action asserts claims and covers a purchase period that overlaps with those asserted in the litigation brought in February 2007. In each of the foregoing matters, LGD is continually evaluating the merits of the respective claims and vigorously defending itself. Irrespective of the validity or the successful assertion of the claims described above, LGD may incur significant costs with respect to litigating or settling any or all of the asserted claims. While LGD continues to vigorously defend the various proceedings described above, it is possible that one or more proceedings may result in an unfavorable outcome. LGD has accrued liabilities in 2009 with respect to those contingencies in which management has concluded that the likelihood of an unfavorable outcome is probable and the amount of loss is reasonably estimable. However, actual liability may be materially different from that estimated as of December 31, 2009 and may have a material adverse effect on its operating results or financial condition.   </div> false false false Includes disclosure of commitments and contingencies. This element may be used as a single block of text to encapsulate the entire disclosure including data and tables. Reference 1: http://www.xbrl.org/2003/role/presentationRef -Publisher FASB -Name FASB Interpretation (FIN) -Number 14 -Paragraph 3 Reference 2: http://www.xbrl.org/2003/role/presentationRef -Publisher FASB -Name Statement of Financial Accounting Standard (FAS) -Number 5 -Paragraph 9, 10, 11, 12 false false 1 1 false UnKnown UnKnown UnKnown false true