I think (I may be mistaken) that the japanese professionals always have played with their only minute-precise time accounting, i.e., the time used per move is rounded down to the next minute (the origins of byoyomi lie herein).
That's not true even today. For example, they have tournaments where you play at, say, 30 seconds a move but on X number of occasions you can think for, say, up to 3 minutes.
I'm not 100% certain, but I believe the most widely used system in Japan since time limits were introduced has been sudden death using chess clocks.
The Hiseikai in 1920 was groundbreaking in introducing even games regardless of rank and time limits. These items were part of its manifesto, and as regards time the manifesto said "Time limits to be up to 32 hours per games, 16 hours per player. Players who have not finished playing before expiry of their time allocation lose the game." I would read that as sudden death.
In addition, there are references to Oteai games, for example, which normally had no scorekeeper and where the players were each expected to memorise the game and record it afterwards - not always accurately or with the same moves. To avoid embarassment some pros would confer, and they would usually omit the ko threats for a final half-point ko (as is still done today).Chess clocks are also specifically mentioned. So putting two and two together and making five, it seems that sudden death was the only system that will fit all the available facts.
The system of byoyomi (counting the seconds) was of course used in the early Yomiuri ten-game matches. It's hard to know exactly what was done in lessser games where the expense of a scorekeeper was a burden. The typical procedure was that a senior pro would secure a contract with a newspaper and he was expected to find two players, arrange every detail of the game, and write a commentary. Apart from the prize-money (about a third of the fee) his budget was meant to cover accommodation and catering. Fees for were not large or regular. Naturally it was not unusual that games were played in his house where Mrs Senior Pro's maid did the catering. It's possible that young pupils were drafted in to keep score, and they could also keep the time, but the players who did not belong to the senior pro's school might worry about bias, so I could imagine more readily that chess clocks were used. In any case, the Yomiuri claimed - I'm not sure how justified the claim is - that the Meijin was the first tournament to use byoyomi. Since it seems to be first and only mentioned in their earlier ten-game matches, it perhaps really was their trademark gimmick.
In more recent times in Korea, there was controversy in the 2000 Nongshim Cup qualification tournament, when it was claimed that the reason for the major upsets of top players was that the games were run on a novel basis: shock, horror, the pros had to press their own clocks. With a time allowance of just 70 minutes and a single overtime period, the older pros were apparently finding it hard to adjust and were either getting into time trouble or even losing on time. The implication is that they were not yet used to overtime - not very many got to play in title matches, remember - and were used to long time limits (the minimum before then was three hours each).
So I infer from all this (and of course from some other things I'm too lazy to mention) that sudden death was the norm in both Japan and Korea, and maybe still is, but long time limits were a natural concomitant. And, as T Mark said, sudden death has long been the norm among Oriental amateurs - it seems likely that they would tend to ape the pros.
Even with byoyomi, pro usage has differed from ours. In game 3 of the 2009 Myeongin title match, Yi Ch'ang-ho went to the loo during byoyomi, having just made his move. While he was away, the timekeeper started counting down for Weon Seong-chin, who was startled but made his move in time. The reason Weon was startled is that the rules say that the clock can be stopped while the opponent is at the toilet. In other words, Weon expected to have had all the extra time while Yi was in the loo.
The debate was initially whether the timekeeper was right. The rules say the clock "can" be stopped, but don't actually say who makes the decision. One view was that the scorekeeper was correct but perhaps too literal minded. The next debate was whether this should affect the result. It appears that Weon "with good grace" gave way during the confab afterwards with referee Kim Tong-myeon because he was some way behind anyway (he lost by 3.5), but the inference was that if it had been close, or if he had made a mistake when rushed, he could have had a valid claim for a ruling in his favour.
There is potential for similar disputes with another Hanguk Giwon rule, which is that the clock may be stopped "for a short while" in the case of a large capture while prisoners are removed. No time or number is specified. This is essentially the law of unintended effects wreaking havoc again. The gentlemanly rules were drawn up in the days before the very short time limits of modern Korean go became the norm, when byoyomi was much less of a consideration, if any.
It also has to be said that the tournament rules for Korean pros are much more complex than the Japanese equivalent - more like the way we would do it - and are constantly being tweaked. It's therefore no surprise to me that the Koreans have more disputes than the Japanese, though there are other factors.
I think that your approach of the case is not the best possible one. There are also Eastern 
players (famous professionals) who many times were getting into time trouble. Were they disorganized? 