Hyeonsu “Elliot” Jin
MP elliot@decentlaw.ioElliot served as a corporate lawyer at Pyeongan Lawfirm and as in-house counsel for Chai Corporation, providing diverse corporate advisory services.
- Corporate · Startups
- Cross-border · Dispute Resolution
- Crypto
- VC · Financial Advisory
- IP Litigation
- Sports
Related News
-
BlogsKorea's E-Commerce Act Amendments: 3 Legal Risks for Platform and Commerce Operators
The proposed amendments to the Enforcement Decree and Enforcement Rules of Korea's Act on Consumer Protection in Electronic Commerce have significantly raised the legal compliance bar for platform and commerce businesses operating in the Korean market. This is not simply a matter of updating a few lines in your terms of service. The changes affect the full scope of operational structure — from how reviews are managed, to how payment screens are designed, to the extent of liability for C2C intermediary platforms. Here are the three risks that require the closest attention right now. 1. Review and Rating Operations: No Policy Means Liability The amendments are designed to require platforms to clearly disclose to consumers the rules governing user reviews and ratings. Specifically, platforms will need to communicate who is eligible to write a review, how long reviews remain posted, how ratings and scores are calculated, the criteria and procedures for removing or hiding reviews, and how users can contest a removal decision. The following situations already represent concrete legal exposure: Selectively removing or hiding critical reviews without publicly disclosed internal criteria, displaying sponsored or paid reviews in the same format as organic user reviews, and mixing undisclosed paid advertising placement into rating or ranking algorithms — all of these create regulatory risk under the amended framework. The bottom line is documentation. Precisely defining when reviews can be posted and when they can be taken down — across your terms of service, operational policies, and internal management manuals — is the most urgent compliance task right now. 2. Dark Pattern Regulation: A Baseline Risk for Every Commerce Operator The amendment package, together with consumer protection guidelines already in force, is tightening regulation of so-called dark patterns — deceptive interface design practices — across pricing, discounts, shipping, refund policies, subscription structures, and cancellation UX. The practices most likely to attract scrutiny include: overstating discounts or coupon value relative to the actual amount charged at checkout; obscuring auto-renewal or subscription conversion terms, or making cancellation buttons difficult to find; and failing to clearly display shipping costs, additional fees, or return conditions before the final payment step. Under the revised penalty framework, a single repeat violation can now trigger a surcharge of up to 50% on top of the base penalty, and four or more repeat violations can result in a surcharge of up to 100% — with administrative fines also being raised across the board. For startups, e-commerce operators, and platform businesses, this means UI/UX design decisions — not just contract language — now need to be reviewed through the lens of the E-Commerce Act and consumer protection law. 3. C2C Platform Liability: The Limits of Intermediary Immunity The amended E-Commerce Act and its follow-on enforcement decree now impose affirmative obligations on C2C (consumer-to-consumer) platforms as registered e-commerce intermediaries — regardless of whether they are direct sellers. Under the proposed rules, the range of personal information platforms must verify for individual sellers is being narrowed: the existing five-item requirement (name, date of birth, address, phone number, email address) is being reduced to two (phone number and email address). However, obligations to preserve and provide transaction records and to cooperate in consumer dispute resolution are being strengthened. The defense that "we bear no responsibility because we are merely an intermediary" is becoming increasingly untenable. What will determine the scope of a platform's legal liability is how it has structured its terms of service liability limitations, its dispute resolution and reporting processes, and its criteria for sanctioning or removing sellers. What Should You Be Reviewing Now? These amendments are not an abstract legal development — they directly affect platform architecture (marketplace, C2C, cross-border), review and ranking logic, and the design of pricing, subscription, and cancellation flows. Decent Law Firm's Corporate Practice provides integrated legal support through our E-Commerce Law, Platform Advisory, and Consumer Protection Law practices — covering full review and revision of terms and operational policies, legal guidance on UI/UX design to eliminate dark pattern exposure, and the design of documentation structures to withstand regulatory scrutiny and disputes. If you need to assess whether your platform's review policies or payment structures are compliant with the amended framework, contact Decent Law Firm today.'
2026-03-27 -
Blogs
Algorithm Trading Scams in Korea: How to Report AI Auto-Trading Fraud
Victims who invested based on promises of "stable returns through AI auto-trading" are increasingly finding themselves unable to recover even their principal. The one thing they all have in common: the regret of not having been suspicious sooner. What These Scams Actually Look Like The common thread running through recent algorithm trading fraud cases in Korea is the use of AI, algorithmic trading, and automated systems as a front for stock or ETF investment schemes. In one documented case, operators raised over 20 billion KRW by promising "stable, loss-free returns through US stocks and ETFs" — while showing investors fabricated account balance screens with no actual trading taking place. These operations typically manipulate their own apps or websites to display fictitious profits, then demand additional deposits under the guise of taxes, fees, or withdrawal processing charges. In most cases, the underlying structure is a classic Ponzi scheme — using new investor funds to pay returns to earlier participants. Warning Signs to Watch For If the service you're using matches any of the following, treat it as a serious red flag. • Impossible guarantees — Claims of loss-free stable returns, fixed monthly gains of 10–15%, or annual returns of 600% or more. These figures are not achievable through legitimate financial products. • Zero transparency — No explanation of which assets or strategies are being used. Just repeated assurances that "the AI handles everything." • Non-standard trading infrastructure — Use of a proprietary app or website rather than a licensed brokerage platform. Deposit accounts held in individual names or virtual accounts rather than a registered corporate entity. • False authority — Fabricated or exaggerated claims of affiliation with globally recognized asset managers, academics, or financial regulators. If anything feels off, stop sending money immediately and start preserving evidence. If You've Already Been Victimized: What to Do Now If you've transferred funds and suspect fraud, the priority is evidence preservation — not confronting the operator. Step 1 — Preserve all evidence Save everything: promotional messages, KakaoTalk or Telegram conversations, promotional materials and contracts, screenshots of the app or website showing balances, returns, and withdrawal requests (do this before the site goes dark), and full records of all deposits and withdrawals. Step 2 — Report to the Financial Supervisory Service File a report with the FSS Illegal Financial Investment Reporting Center. Submissions are cross-referenced with similar cases and can trigger coordinated investigations. Step 3 — File a criminal complaint A formal complaint can be filed with the police or prosecutor's office on charges of fraud, and where applicable, violation of the Act on the Regulation of Similar Receiving of Investments. When multiple victims file simultaneously, cases are often escalated to joint task force investigations. In parallel with criminal proceedings, civil remedies — including provisional seizure of the perpetrator's assets and claims for damages — should be considered to maximize the likelihood of actual recovery. How Decent Law Firm Can Help Algorithm trading fraud is structurally designed to look like a legitimate investment service, which makes it genuinely difficult to distinguish from an ordinary investment loss. Building a case requires systematically documenting what misrepresentations were made, who was involved, and at what point the fraudulent structure was in place. Decent Law Firm's Litigation Practice reconstructs the fraud architecture and the specific points of deception using contracts, messaging records, and app screenshots — and designs a coordinated strategy combining criminal prosecution with civil asset recovery. If you were promised high returns through AI auto-trading or algorithmic investment, and you're now experiencing withdrawal delays, demands for additional deposits, or complete loss of contact, don't wait. Contact Decent Law Firm's Litigation Practice today.
2026-03-27 -
Blogs
Crypto Futures Trading Scams in Korea: Are Traders and Promoters Also Liable?
Crypto futures "signal groups" — private channels that claim to share exclusive trading tips — may look like legitimate investment communities on the surface. But depending on how they operate, they can expose everyone involved to serious criminal liability under Korean law, including violations of the Financial Investment Services and Capital Markets Act (FSCMA), fraud charges, and the Act on the Aggravated Punishment of Specific Economic Crimes. What many don't realize is that it's not just the organizers who get prosecuted. Analysts, mentors, and promoters are increasingly being indicted as co-conspirators. How Serious Are the Penalties? Two core charges typically apply in these cases: operating an unregistered investment advisory or discretionary service under the FSCMA, and fraud through false or misleading information. If you directed buy/sell timing and leverage ratios for clients without proper financial registration — and received fees or a share of profits in return — you could face up to three years in prison or a fine of up to 100 million KRW. Add in guarantees of high returns, promises to cover losses, or fabricated profit screenshots and fake trading screens, and fraud charges stack on top. When victim losses exceed certain thresholds, penalties escalate sharply under the Aggravated Punishment Act: Over 500 million KRW → minimum 3 years imprisonment Over 5 billion KRW → minimum 5 years imprisonment Who Gets Charged — and for What? These operations typically divide labor: a ringleader who runs the group, analysts or mentors who give trading calls, and promoters or account managers who recruit investors. • Ringleaders and Mentors Ringleaders control the group setup, the scripts, and the money flow. Korean courts treat them as primary offenders — the ones who bear the heaviest sentences across fraud, FSCMA violations, and the Aggravated Punishment Act. Analysts and mentors who gave specific trade instructions, or who fabricated credentials to gain investor trust, are regularly indicted alongside ringleaders as co-offenders. • Promoters "I was just doing marketing" is rarely an effective defense. Even if your only role was funneling people into the group via Instagram DMs, KakaoTalk, or Telegram, knowingly recruiting investors into a fraudulent operation can make you liable for aiding and abetting fraud — or as a full co-conspirator. In structures where promoters received a significant cut of investor trading fees through referral commissions, Korean prosecutors have treated them as an integral part of the criminal enterprise. There are documented cases where dozens of staff members were referred to prosecutors simultaneously on fraud and Financial Information Act violation charges. Why "I Only Took a Referral Fee" Won't Hold Up A common setup in Korea-based crypto futures signal groups involves partnering with offshore exchanges. Promoters drive sign-ups through referral codes and earn a percentage of each investor's trading fees — meaning the more an investor trades (and loses), the more the organization earns. Prosecutors view this as a structure designed to push investors toward high-risk, high-leverage trades to generate fee income — and they open investigations accordingly. Promoters and sales staff often argue: "I never gave trade instructions. I just helped people sign up and collected referral fees." But if the evidence shows any of the following, you may be assessed as an active participant in the fraud rather than a peripheral one: You approached unspecified individuals with exaggerated claims of high returns or loss recovery You were aware that the structure was heavily disadvantageous to investors You continued recruiting even after it became foreseeable that investors would suffer losses That said, where a promoter's actual role, knowledge, and financial benefit were genuinely limited, there are cases where thorough documentation at the investigation stage led to a finding of no grounds for indictment. Were You Involved in Promoting or Running a Signal Group? If you have a history of involvement — or are currently participating in a referral fee arrangement — you need to assess your criminal exposure before investigators come to you. Start by getting clear on the facts: What exactly did you tell investors? What did you actually know about how the operation worked? And how much did you receive in fees or incentives? Organizing this into a clear, documented account is the essential first step. If You've Been Notified of an Investigation, Act Now Decent Law Firm's virtual asset practice has handled cases involving signal group operators, analysts, and promoters — carefully distinguishing the degree of involvement in fraud, FSCMA violations, and Financial Information Act charges to build targeted defense strategies. If you've received notice of an investigation into a crypto futures signal group, or you're concerned about potential exposure, don't assume your role was too minor to matter. Getting your role and the evidence organized before the investigation escalates is the safest move you can make. Speak with a Korean virtual asset attorney today.
2026-03-25
