A confirmation related to performance pay issued in 2018 by K Cube Ventures (now Kakao Ventures) to former Kakao CEO Lim Ji-hoon (left) and an official reply letter Kakao Ventures sent to Lim’s side in August 2026 rejecting payment of performance pay. [Photo: Screenshot from former Kakao CEO Lim Ji-hoon’s Brunch]

Former Kakao CEO Lim Ji-hoon (임지훈), who has filed a lawsuit over performance pay against Kakao Ventures and Kakao founder Kim Beom-su, disclosed a performance pay confirmation he received in 2018 from K Cube Ventures, now Kakao Ventures, and an official letter this year rejecting payment.

Lim disclosed the two documents on his Brunch on Oct. 27, saying it was not a verbal promise. He claimed there is an executed contract, an amendment agreement and a confirmation stamped with the company seal.

The disclosed confirmation dated Feb. 13, 2018, says that following Lim’s appointment as Kakao chief executive, the parties signed an agreement on changes to the “Kakao Youth Startup Fund performance pay contract” and changed the preferential attribution ratio used to calculate performance pay.

The confirmation explained that the change to the preferential attribution ratio reflected all of Lim’s contributions up to his appointment as Kakao chief executive. It also stated that, in exchange for lowering the ratio, the parties intended to pay Lim 100 percent of the calculated performance pay regardless of the job performance period under provisions of the related performance pay contract.

The confirmation lists the company name at the time, K Cube Ventures Co Ltd, and the names of its co-chief executives, and bears the corporate seal.

According to the confirmation, K Cube Ventures signed a Kakao Youth Startup Fund performance pay contract on Jan. 2, 2015, with Lim and others. After Lim was appointed Kakao chief executive on Sept. 23 that year, it signed another agreement on changes to the performance pay contract on Dec. 14.

Lim has previously said that in the amendment process his share of the preferential attribution ratio was lowered to 22 percent from 60 percent. In the latest post, he again claimed the purpose of the amendment agreement was to lower the ratio in exchange for paying him the full amount of performance pay calculated for him regardless of his period of employment.

He also said Kim discussed the contents of the 2018 confirmation with him one-on-one.

But the reply letter Kakao Ventures sent this year contained a different view.

In the Aug. 12 reply titled “Reply regarding request for payment of performance pay” disclosed by Lim, the company wrote that it had received on July 27 a document from Lim’s side requesting payment of performance pay.

Kakao Ventures said in the letter, “After reviewing related contracts and the like, we judged there is no basis to pay the performance pay amount you claim,” and “We inform you that we cannot pay the performance pay amount you claim.”

The disclosed letter did not include a detailed explanation of which contract clauses or legal grounds Kakao Ventures relied on in judging it could not make the payment.

Along with disclosing the documents, Lim reiterated his existing claim that it was not a verbal promise and that he has the right to be paid under the existing performance pay contract and the amendment agreement.