AK STEEL TYPES 430, 434, 435 MOD, 436

AK Steel Types 430, 434, 435 Mod, and 436 are ferritic stainless steels that provide a combination of corrosion resistance, functionality, and beauty that make them suitable for many roll-formed and stamped automotive trim applications. This datasheet provides information on composition, physical properties, hardness, elasticity, and tensile properties. It also includes information on corrosion resistance as well as forming and joining. Filing Code: SS-1314. Producer or source: AK Steel Corporation.

AK STEEL TYPE 201

AK Steel Type 201 is a chromium-manganese-nickel austenitic stainless steel that was developed to conserve nickel. Its properties are similar to those of Type 301. It is a lower cost alternative to Type 301 in certain environments. This datasheet provides information on composition, physical properties, hardness, elasticity, and tensile properties. It also includes information on high temperature performance and corrosion resistance as well as forming and joining. Filing Code: SS-1313. Producer or source: AK Steel Corporation.

Yeo Woon Taek v. New Nippon Steel Corporation

On October 30, 2018, the South Korean Supreme Court, in an 11–2 decision, upheld the judgment of the lower court, which ordered New Nippon Steel Corporation, a Japanese company, to provide KRW 100 million (approximately USD 84,000) in compensation to each of the four plaintiffs, who were forced to work at Japanese steel mills during World War II. In an earlier 2012 decision, the Supreme Court remanded the case after holding that the claims were not precluded by the Agreement on the Settlement of Problems Concerning Property and Claims and the Economic Cooperation Between the Republic of Korea and Japan (Claims Agreement). The Supreme Court held that the Claims Agreement was not a result of negotiation about compensation for Japanese colonization, but rather was a political agreement the purpose of which was to resolve the financial and civil debt/credit relationship between Korea and Japan. On the final appeal, the Supreme Court concluded that plaintiffs’ claims were directly related to the illegality of Japan's colonial rule over the Korean Peninsula and that the rights of the victims of forced labor to make a compensation claim did not fall within the scope of the Claims Agreement.