Logical Sentence Connections: Cheat Sheet

🔗 1. Use Purposeful Transition Words

Transitions guide your reader through your reasoning. Choose based on what relationship you're expressing.

👉 To show cause and effect

• Therefore, Thus, As such, Consequently, Accordingly
  Example:

The goods do not meet the criteria under GRI 3(b). Therefore, they must be classified separately.

👉 To add a supporting point

• Moreover, In addition, Furthermore, It is also worth noting
  Example:

The items serve different functions. Moreover, they are not packaged for a common use.

👉 To contrast or qualify

• However, Nonetheless, On the other hand, That said
  Example:

The watch is packaged with the shoes. However, it does not share a functional relationship.

👉 To give examples or clarification

• For example, Namely, In particular, Specifically, That is
  Example:

This applies to many consumer goods sold as bundles. For example, toothbrushes and toys packaged together.

---

🔧 2. Repeat Key Terms Strategically (Not Excessively)

Reusing a keyword from the previous sentence can strengthen the logical flow.

Example:

GRI 3(b) applies only to retail sets packaged for a shared use.
This shared use requirement is not met in the current case, as the items are unrelated in function.

---

🧠 3. Use Pronouns and Determiners Thoughtfully

Words like this, these, such, the former, the latter help avoid repetition while keeping ideas connected.

Example:

The Crocs and the G-Shock serve distinct purposes.
Such a combination lacks a unified purpose and fails to qualify as a set.

---

🪜 4. Build Paragraphs Like Stepping Stones

Each sentence should:

1. Expand on the one before it,
2. Or lead to the next idea logically.

Bad flow:

The shoes and the watch are different items. GRI 3(b) talks about sets. The watch is digital.

Better flow:

The shoes and the watch are clearly different in both function and form.
According to GRI 3(b), goods must be intended for a shared activity to qualify as a set.
Since the watch is digital and the shoes serve no complementary purpose, they do not meet this criterion.

 

 

 

 

 

< Example 1: Evaluating the Impact of Remote Work on Employee Productivity >

  The shift to remote work has prompted organizations to assess its effects on employee productivity. Studies indicate that remote work can lead to increased productivity due to factors such as reduced commuting time and flexible scheduling. For instance, a 2021 survey by Prodoscore reported a 47% increase in worker productivity compared to the previous year. However, challenges like communication barriers and feelings of isolation may offset these gains. Therefore, while remote work has the potential to enhance productivity, it is essential for organizations to implement strategies that address its associated challenges to fully realize its benefits.

 

Analysis:

1. Introduction of Topic: The paragraph begins by introducing the shift to remote work and its relevance to employee productivity.​
2. Presentation of Supporting Evidence: It cites studies indicating increased productivity, exemplified by a specific survey reporting a 47% rise.​
3. Acknowledgment of Counterpoints: The paragraph recognizes potential challenges, such as communication issues and isolation, that could mitigate productivity gains.​
4. Conclusion: It concludes by emphasizing the need for organizations to proactively address these challenges to maximize the benefits of remote work.​

This example demonstrates logical writing by presenting a balanced argument: introducing the topic, providing evidence, acknowledging counterarguments, and concluding with a reasoned statement.

 

 

< Example 2: Assessing the Enforceability of Non-Compete Agreements in Employment Contracts >

  In evaluating the enforceability of non-compete clauses within employment contracts, it is essential to consider the jurisdiction's legal standards governing such provisions. Generally, courts assess non-compete agreements based on three primary factors: duration, geographic scope, and the legitimate business interests the employer seeks to protect. A clause imposing restrictions beyond a reasonable timeframe or extending to an unreasonably broad geographic area may be deemed unenforceable. Furthermore, the employer must demonstrate that the non-compete serves to protect legitimate business interests, such as trade secrets or client relationships. Absent these justifications, courts are inclined to rule such provisions as overly restrictive and, consequently, unenforceable. Therefore, when drafting non-compete clauses, it is imperative to ensure that the restrictions are narrowly tailored to protect legitimate business interests without unduly limiting an employee's ability to seek employment.​

---

Analysis:

1. Introduction of Legal Framework: The paragraph begins by highlighting the importance of understanding jurisdictional standards when evaluating non-compete clauses.​
2. Identification of Key Factors: It outlines the three critical factors courts consider: duration, geographic scope, and legitimate business interests.​
3. Application of Factors: The paragraph explains how excessive restrictions in duration or geography can render a clause unenforceable and emphasizes the necessity for employers to justify the clause with legitimate business interests.​
4. Conclusion and Practical Implication: It concludes by advising that non-compete clauses should be carefully drafted to balance the protection of business interests with the employee's right to employment.​

This example demonstrates logical writing by clearly presenting the legal criteria, applying them to the context of non-compete clauses, and concluding with practical guidance, ensuring a coherent and persuasive argument.

 

 

< Example 3: Legality of Recording a Phone Call Without Consent >

  To assess whether recording a phone call without the other party's consent is lawful, we must consider the relevant provisions under Korea’s Protection of Communications Secrets Act. The Act prohibits the interception or recording of communication conducted between other people without consent. However, it does not criminalize one-party consent recording, meaning if one participant of the conversation records the call, it is generally not considered illegal. In this scenario, if an individual records a call in which they themselves are a participant, and the recording is not shared publicly in a way that violates defamation or privacy laws, such an act would not fall under the prohibition set by the Act.

Therefore, recording a call in which the recorder is a direct party is generally lawful under Korean law.

 

 

< Example 4: HS Classification – Power Bank with Built-in Flashlight >
  To determine the correct classification of the imported item—a power bank equipped with a built-in flashlight—we must refer to the General Rules for the Interpretation of the Harmonized System (GRI).
  Under GRI 3(c), when goods are classifiable under two or more headings and no single component gives the item its essential character, classification is determined by the heading which occurs last in numerical order among those under consideration.
  In this case, the power bank (HS 8504) and the flashlight (HS 8513) serve distinct functions, and neither component clearly dominates in terms of essential character. The flashlight is secondary but functional, while the power bank is the primary feature. However, if their functions are closely integrated and neither outweighs the other, GRI 3(c) applies.
Therefore, in the absence of a dominant essential character, the item should be classified under the heading that appears last in numerical order—HS 8513.

 

 

< Example 5: whether a company qualifies for FTA preferential duty >

   The Korea–U.S. Free Trade Agreement (KORUS FTA) prescribes that in order for goods to be eligible for preferential duty treatment, they must originate in either Korea or the United States and satisfy the product-specific rules of origin. According to Annex 6-A of the Agreement, footwear classified under HS code 6404 must undergo a change in tariff classification and meet regional value content thresholds to qualify.

   In this case, the importer has submitted a Certificate of Origin claiming KORUS benefits for footwear manufactured in Vietnam, with minimal processing conducted in Korea. The production records show that the essential character of the goods was formed outside the FTA territories, and no substantial transformation occurred in Korea.

   As such, the conditions set forth in the FTA are not met, and the goods cannot be deemed originating under KORUS. Consequently, the claim for preferential duty must be denied.

 

 

< Example 6: Subject: Customs Classification Advice for SKU#211790 – Crocs x G-Shock Bundle >

 

Thank you for your inquiry regarding the classification and import treatment of SKU#211790, which includes both Crocs footwear and a G-Shock wristwatch sold together in a single retail package.

Please find my customs guidance below, based on the Harmonized System (HS) rules and standard classification practices.

1. Treatment as a Retail Set under GRI 3(b)
To determine how this product should be classified, we first need to consider whether the two items - Crocs shoes and a G-Shock watch - qualify as a "set put up for retail sale" under General Rule of Interpretation (GRI) 3(b).

According to the Explanatory Notes to GRI 3(b), a set for retail sale must:
  (a) Consist of at least two different articles classifiable under different headings;
  (b) Be put up together to meet a particular need or carry out a specific activity; and
  (c) Be packaged in a manner suitable for direct sale to end users without repacking.

In this case, while criteria (a) and (c) are clearly met (i.e., the shoes and watch are different articles in distinct headings,  packaged together in a retail-ready box), it is criterion (b) that poses a challenge.

The footwear and the watch serve independent functions and are not intended to be used together to fulfill a particular activity or need (e.g., cooking set, grooming kit). The inclusion of both items appears to be for promotional or branding  synergy rather than functional interdependence.

Conclusion: Because the items are not intended to be used together to meet a specific need or perform a common activity, they do not qualify as a "set" under GRI 3(b). As such, they should be classified separately based on their individual characteristics.

2. HS Classification Suggestions
Crocs Footwear (SKU#211190-90H):
This item should be classified under the same HS code typically used for other Crocs products, based on the material composition and construction (e.g., EVA, closed-toe/open-heel design).

G-Shock Watch (SKU#211791-90H):
Based on the images provided, the watch appears to be a non-precious metal wristwatch with both analog and digital (opto-electronic) displays. 

A likely classification would be under HS 9102.19, which covers wristwatches, whether or not incorporating a stopwatch  function, with opto-electronic display only. However, final determination depends on how the watch operates (quartz, automatic, battery type, etc.).

I recommend confirming the precise operational mechanism with the manufacturer to ensure accurate classification at the 8- or 10-digit level. It’s also likely that G-Shock manages their own internal classifications.

Let me know if you’d like support drafting the product description for the customs invoice or need further assistance with  country-specific duty/tax implications.

Best regards,