*This content was translated by AI.
"The past actions of MBK and Yeongpoong surrounding 'Project Crucible' are once again drawing attention. Korea Zinc recently filed a police report against MBK Partners and Yeongpoong, accusing them of unauthorized use of the name and logo for 'Project Crucible,' the US integrated smelter construction project."
Particularly, as MBK and Yeongpoong have recently stated in official statements that their actions were not aimed at halting the project itself but rather at preventing irregular new share issuance, past remarks are being re-examined.
Industry insiders point out that based on past board voting results, court injunction filings, and official press releases by MBK and Yeongpoong, such claims appear inconsistent with their previous positions.
At the time, MBK and Yeongpoong used expressions such as 'collusion,' 'surrender of zinc sovereignty,' and 'decision detrimental to national interest' to criticize not only the project's structure but also its purpose and overall economic and security implications.
According to some media reports and industry sources, during Korea Zinc's board meeting held in December last year, directors recommended by Yeongpoong and MBK reportedly voted against all six agenda items related to the project, including US smelter construction, investment attraction, joint venture capital contribution, and third-party allocation rights offering (paid-in capital increase).
At the time, an executive from MBK and Yeongpoong reportedly explained that since the six agenda items were substantially interconnected, opposing the third-party allocation rights offering meant they had no choice but to oppose all other items as well.
However, given their attempt to reject the core transaction structure of a project designed with US government and investor participation in mind, evaluations suggest this could have made it difficult or caused delays in advancing the project itself.
MBK and Yeongpoong also filed an injunction request with the court to halt new share issuance at that time. Had the court accepted this, it would be hard to rule out the possibility that the project's progress would have faced significant obstacles beyond the timeline for US government and strategic investor participation.
According to legal industry sources, MBK and Yeongpoong reportedly criticized the business and investment structure in preparatory documents submitted to the court in December last year as a 'collusion' with the US government that sacrificed Korea Zinc's interests to preserve management control.
In a press release distributed on the day of the project announcement, they used expressions such as 'surrender of zinc sovereignty,' 'decision detrimental to national interest,' and 'white knight for defending management rights,' demanding a fundamental re-examination of the project.
Based solely on the content of that press release, it could be interpreted that MBK and Yeongpoong expressed significant negativity or raised concerns not only about the new share issuance method but also regarding the entire US smelter project.
Amid this, controversy arose when it was revealed that MBK and Yeongpoong recently held a reception in the United States under the name 'Project Crucible.' According to media reports, they invited Tennessee state government officials, community leaders, and journalists to a reception last July.
MBK Vice Chairman Yoon Jong-ha and Yeongpoong Moon Ko Hol-ding-seu (CEO) attended the event. Jang (CEO) reportedly made remarks indicating that Yeongpoong's Seopo Smelter technology could be applied to the project. Notably, MBK and Yeongpoong are said to have registered and used the domain 'crucibleTN.com' during the event proceedings.
In response, Korea Zinc filed a police report against Yeongpoong and MBK for violating the Fair Competition Act and obstructing business, arguing that such actions could mislead the public into believing they were official promoters of the project or partners of Korea Zinc.
On the other hand, Yeongpoong and MBK countered that the project name is not a registered trademark and that explaining the project to the US government and local community as the largest shareholder constitutes legitimate shareholder activity.
As both sides engage in a fierce exchange, some observers argue that given their past opposition to all project-related agenda items, filing injunctions, and legally defining the project as 'collusion' and 'detrimental to national interest' in official documents, recent claims that they never opposed the project itself lack credibility.
<© STARNEWS. All rights reserved. No reproduction or redistribution allowed.>
*This content was translated by AI.
