A South Korean court has cleared the way for Korea Zinc to proceed with a controversial share issuance tied to its $7.4 billion U.S. smelter project, rejecting an attempt by major shareholders to block the move. The ruling removes a critical obstacle for one of the most strategically significant critical-minerals investments linking South Korea and the United States.
At YourNewsClub, we see the decision as a signal that courts are increasingly weighing corporate strategy and geopolitical alignment alongside traditional shareholder concerns. The case was brought by MBK Partners and YoungPoong, which together control roughly 46% of Korea Zinc and argued the planned share sale would unfairly dilute existing investors.
Markets reacted swiftly. Korea Zinc shares jumped as much as 5%, while YoungPoong’s stock slid sharply, reflecting investor confidence that the U.S. project is now likely to proceed. From our perspective at YourNewsClub, the divergence underscores how the market is prioritizing strategic expansion over near-term governance disputes.
The project at the center of the dispute involves building a large-scale critical minerals processing facility in Tennessee, backed substantially by U.S. government support. The plant is intended to reduce American reliance on China for materials essential to semiconductors, electronics, and defense applications. Korea Zinc plans to sell about $1.9 billion worth of new shares to a joint venture controlled by the U.S. government and unnamed American strategic investors, giving the group roughly a 10% stake in the Korean firm.
That structure carries implications beyond financing. As Alex Reinhardt, financial systems and liquidity, noted to YourNewsClub: “This is not passive capital. A state-aligned shareholder changes the internal balance of power and dramatically lowers political risk for U.S. operations.” The issuance is widely seen as strengthening the position of Korea Zinc’s chairman, Yun B. Choi, who has been locked in a control battle with MBK and YoungPoong since last year.
Critics argue the deal prioritizes control over shareholder equality, but the court’s rejection of the injunction suggests a broader interpretation of corporate interest. Maya Renn, technology ethics and access to power, frames the outcome more starkly: “When industrial policy enters the boardroom, governance norms bend. Courts are increasingly validating strategy over symmetry.”
At Your News Club, we view the ruling as emblematic of a wider shift in sectors tied to critical supply chains. Companies positioned at the intersection of minerals, energy, and national security are finding that strategic alignment with governments can outweigh conventional capital-structure concerns. For Korea Zinc, the decision accelerates its entry into the U.S. market. For its dissenting shareholders, it narrows the options in a control fight now shaped as much by geopolitics as by corporate law.