WT/DS504/2  
 
10 June 2016  
(16-3171)  Page: 1/2  
  Original: English  
 
  KOREA - ANTI-DUMPING DUTIES ON  PNEUMATIC VALVES FROM JAPAN 
REQUEST FOR THE ESTABLISHM ENT OF A PANEL BY JAPAN 
The following communication, dated 9 June 2016, from the delegation of Japan to the Chairperson 
of the Dispute Settlement Body, is circulated pursuant to Article 6.2 of the DSU. 
 
_______________ 
My authorities have instructed me to request th e establishment of a panel with respect to the 
measures by the Republic of Korea ("Korea") imposing anti-dumping duties on valves for pneumatic transmission ("pneumatic valves") from Japan.  Japan submits this request pursuant to 
Articles 4.7 and 6 of the Understanding on Rules and Procedures Governing the Settlement of 
Disputes ("DSU"), Article XXIII of the Gene ral Agreement on Tariffs and Trade 1994 
("GATT 1994"), and Article17.4 of the Agreement on Implementation of Article VI of the General 
Agreement on Tariffs and Trade 1994 ("AD Agreement"). 
On 15 March 2016, Japan requested consultations with Korea.
1  Japan and Korea held 
consultations on 28 April 2016, with a view to reaching a mutually satisfactory solution.  Unfortunately, the consultations failed to settle the dispute. 
Korea's measures imposing anti-dumping duties on pneumatic valves from Japan are set forth in 
the Korea Trade Commission's "Resolution of Final Determination on Presence of Dumped Facts of Valves for Pneumatic Transmissions from Japan and Injury to the Domestic Industry", a determination based on the Office of Trade Investigation's "Final Report on Dumping Fact and 
Injury to Domestic Industry of Japanese Produced Valves for Pneumatic Transmissions" in 
Investigation Trade Remedy 23-2013-5, both dated 20 January 2015, including any and all annexes and amendments thereto.
2 
Japan considers that these measures are inconsistent with Korea's obligations under the following 
provisions of the AD Agreement: 
1. Articles 3.1 and 3.2 of the AD Agreement because Korea's analysis of a 
significant increase of the imports under investigation did not involve an objective 
examination based on positive evidence; 
2. Articles 3.1 and 3.2 of the AD Agreement because Korea's analysis of the 
effect of the imports under investigation on prices in the domestic market for like 
products did not involve an objective examination based on positive evidence; and 
because Korea failed to properly consider whether the effect of the imports under investigation was to depress prices to a significant degree or prevent price increase, 
which otherwise would have occurred, to a significant degree; 
3. Articles 3.1 and 3.4 of the AD Agreement because Korea's analysis of the 
impact of the imports under investigation on the domestic industry at issue did not 
involve an objective examination based on positive evidence, including an evaluation 
of all relevant economic factors and indices having a bearing on the state of the domestic industry at issue; 
                                               
1 WTO/DS504/1, circulated on 16 March 2016 
2 These anti-dumping measures are identified in Korea’s notification G/ADP/N/280/KOR dated 
6 April 2016.   
WT/DS504/2 
 
- 2 - 
 
  4. Articles 3.1 and 3.5 of the AD Agreement because Korea failed to demonstrate 
that the imports under investigation were, through the effects of dumping, causing 
injury to the domestic industry based on an objective examination of the alleged causal relationship between the imports under investigation and the alleged injury to 
the domestic industry, on the basis of all relevant positive evidence before the 
authorities;  
5. Articles 3.1 and 3.5 of the AD Agreement because Korea failed to consider 
adequately all known factors other than the imports under investigation that were 
injuring the domestic industry at the same time and therefore incorrectly attributed injury caused by these other factors to the imports under investigation; 
6. Articles 3.1 and 3.5 of the AD Agreement because Korea's demonstration of 
causation lacks any foundation in its analyses of the volume of the imports under 
investigation, the effects of the imports under investigation on prices, and/or the impact of the imports under investigation on the domestic industry at issue, 
irrespective and independent of whether Korea's flawed analysis of the volume 
and/or flawed analysis of the effects of the imports under investigation on prices, on the one hand, and Korea's flawed analysis of the impact of the imports under 
investigation on the domestic industry on the other, would be inconsistent with, 
respectively, Articles 3.1 and 3.2 of the AD Agreement and Articles 3.1 and 3.4 of the AD Agreement; 
7. Articles 3.1 and 4.1 of the AD Agreement because Korea failed to make an 
objective examination based on positive evidence in defining the domestic industry 
producing the like product and consequently in making a determination of injury; 
8. Article 6.5 of the AD Agreement because Korea treated allegedly confidential 
information provided by the interested parties as confidential without good cause 
shown;  
9. Article 6.5.1 of the AD Agreement because Korea: (a) failed to require the 
applicants to furnish non-confidential summaries of their submissions, questionnaire 
responses, and amendments thereof; and (b) where such summaries were provided, 
they were not in sufficient detail to permit a reasonable understanding of the substance of the information submitted in confidence; 
10. Article 6.9 of the AD Agreement because Korea failed to inform the interested 
parties of the essential facts under consideration which formed the basis for the decision to impose definitive anti-dumping measures; 
11. Article 12.2 of the AD Agreement because Korea failed to provide in sufficient 
detail the findings and conclusions reached on all issues of fact and law the investigating authorities considered material by the investigating authorities; and  
12. Article 12.2.2 of the AD Agreement because Korea failed to make available all 
relevant information on the matters of fact and law and reasons which have led to the imposition of final measures. 
As a consequence of the apparent breaches of the AD Agreement described above, Korea's anti-
dumping measures on the imports under investigation are also inconsistent with Article 1 of the 
AD Agreement and Article VI of the GATT 1994. 
Korea's measures also nullify or impair the benefits accruing to Japan directly or indirectly under 
the cited agreements. 
Accordingly, Japan respectfully requests that, pursuant to Articles 4.7 and 6 of the DSU, 
Article XXIII of the GATT 1994, an d Article 17.4 of the AD Agreement, the Dispute Settlement 
Body establish a panel to examine this matter, with  the standard terms of reference as set out in 
Article 7.1 of the DSU.  
Japan asks this request to be placed on the Agenda for the meeting of the Dispute Settlement 
Body to be held on 22 June 2016. 
__________