Pureun “Ian” Hong
MP ian@decentlaw.ioIan served as criminal law expert at YK Lawfirm, handling various corporate litigations including private fund investments, STOs, and capital markets.
- Criminal
- Class Action
- Crypto
- Real Estate Disputes · Construction
- Entertainment
Related News
-
BlogsToxic Clauses in Investment Agreements: Key Red Flags Startup Founders Must Check
The outcome of an investment deal is often determined by the information gap between a founder reviewing their first investment agreement and an investor who has negotiated dozens of them before. Common Investment Documents: SPA, SHA, and Term Sheet When startups raise investment, they usually encounter three core legal documents. ▪️Share Purchase Agreement (SPA) The SPA is the primary agreement governing the investor’s acquisition of newly issued shares. It typically covers investment amount, valuation, closing conditions, representations and warranties, and other key transaction terms. ▪️Shareholders’ Agreement (SHA) The SHA regulates the relationship among shareholders after the investment closes. This document often contains the provisions that most directly affect a founder’s control over the company and future exit strategy, including voting rights, board control, transfer restrictions, drag-along rights, and veto rights. ▪️Term Sheet The term sheet summarizes the core investment terms before the definitive agreements are signed. Although parts of a term sheet may be non-binding, it often becomes the framework for the final contracts. In practice, negotiating leverage decreases significantly once the term sheet is signed. Four Toxic Clauses Founders Frequently Overlook ▪️Liquidation Preference Liquidation preference gives investors the right to recover their investment — sometimes more than their original investment — before founders receive any proceeds in an acquisition, merger, or liquidation event. The economic impact depends heavily on: The multiple (1x, 2x, etc.) Whether the preference is participating or non-participating In some cases, founders may receive little to no proceeds even after a successful exit if the liquidation structure heavily favors investors. ▪️Anti-Dilution Protection Anti-dilution clauses protect investors if future financing rounds occur at a lower valuation. The most aggressive version is the “Full Ratchet” mechanism, which can severely dilute founder ownership. More balanced structures typically use a “Weighted Average” adjustment method instead. Founders should carefully review: Trigger conditions Calculation formula Scope of protected securities ▪️Drag-Along Rights Drag-along provisions allow majority shareholders or investors to force minority shareholders to sell their shares under the same terms during a company sale. Without carefully drafted protections, founders may be forced into an exit they do not support. Key issues to negotiate include: Minimum approval thresholds Minimum sale price Founder consent rights Protection against unfavorable deal structures ▪️Reserved Matters and Investor Veto Rights Reserved matters clauses require investor approval for certain company decisions. While some level of oversight is standard, overly broad veto rights can significantly restrict day-to-day management and strategic flexibility. These provisions sometimes extend beyond major corporate actions and into operational matters such as: Hiring decisions Annual budgets Business expansion New product launches Overly expansive veto rights can effectively undermine founder control. Founder Protection Clauses That Should Not Be Missing Reviewing toxic clauses is only part of the process. Equally important is ensuring that the agreement includes provisions protecting the founder’s long-term position. ▪️Tag-Along Rights Tag-along rights allow founders or minority shareholders to participate in a share sale initiated by major investors or controlling shareholders under the same terms and conditions. This prevents founders from being left behind in a partial exit transaction. ▪️Reasonable Non-Compete Restrictions Non-compete clauses are common, particularly when investors are concerned about founder departures. However, the scope must remain reasonable in: Duration Geographic coverage Industry definition Overly broad restrictions can make it difficult for founders to launch future ventures or continue working in their own field. ▪️Flexible Use of Investment Funds Some investment agreements impose rigid limitations on how capital can be spent. Excessively narrow restrictions may prevent startups from pivoting or adapting to market conditions. Maintaining flexibility in operational spending categories is often critical for early-stage companies. Why Startup Founders Should Involve a Lawyer Early Investment agreement review is not simply about proofreading a contract. A startup investment lawyer should help with: Identifying and negotiating toxic clauses Structuring founder protection provisions Anticipating future fundraising and exit scenarios Preparing negotiation strategies against investor revisions Balancing governance and operational flexibility Most importantly, legal review should begin at the Term Sheet stage. Once a founder signs a term sheet, investors often treat the agreed terms as commercially settled, making it far more difficult to renegotiate key provisions later in the process. In many startup investments, the best time to negotiate is before signing anything — not after.
2026-05-15 -
Blogs
Undercover Drug Investigations Approved in Korea: What Changes in Drug Crime Investigations?
Korea’s Drug Investigation System Is Changing In May 2026, South Korea passed legislation allowing undercover investigations for drug crimes, signaling a major shift in how narcotics cases will be investigated and prosecuted. On May 11, 2026, the Korean National Police Agency officially launched a dedicated Task Force (TF) to prepare for the implementation of undercover drug investigations. The TF is expected to establish investigative guidelines, operational manuals, and staffing systems before the law takes effect after the required implementation period. Until now, most drug investigations in Korea relied on reports, surveillance, raids, and digital forensics. Under the new system, however, investigators may legally conceal their identities and directly participate in transactions as part of undercover operations. The framework is expected to apply to both online and offline drug crimes, particularly those involving encrypted messaging apps, darknet marketplaces, and organized distribution networks. Online Drug Transactions May Become Much Easier to Detect According to Korean law enforcement authorities, drug-related arrests have continued to increase, with online drug crimes growing particularly rapidly. Previously, investigators often faced difficulties identifying upper-level distributors because many narcotics operations were conducted anonymously through Telegram, darknet platforms, cryptocurrency payments, and decentralized delivery structures. With undercover investigations now becoming legally available, investigators may pose as buyers, couriers, or intermediaries in order to infiltrate entire distribution networks. As a result, even individuals who believed they were involved only in personal use or small-scale purchases may unexpectedly become subjects of broader investigations. Situations that may now carry significantly higher legal risk include: Attempting to purchase drugs through Telegram or anonymous chat platforms Cryptocurrency-based drug payments Acting as a delivery intermediary or proxy recipient Participating in group purchases Facilitating introductions between buyers and sellers Investigators may now be able to secure direct evidence during the transaction process itself. What This Means for Drug Crime Suspects in Korea 1. The Other Party May Be an Undercover Investigator Under the new framework, investigations will no longer rely solely on tips or accidental detection. Investigators may directly engage in conversations, negotiations, payments, or delivery arrangements while operating undercover. Chat logs, transfer records, delivery information, and meeting arrangements may all become evidence. In some cases, the person communicating with a suspect may actually be a law enforcement officer. 2. Evidence May Become Much Stronger Evidence obtained through undercover operations often includes direct recordings of the transaction process itself, such as: Chat conversations Audio recordings Screenshots Controlled purchases Surveillance footage Because of this, simply denying involvement may become significantly more difficult than before. In many cases, the focus of defense strategy shifts toward explaining the extent of involvement, level of participation, intent, and mitigating circumstances. 3. Investigations May Expand Beyond Simple Possession or Use Korean investigators are increasingly focusing on entire distribution chains rather than only end users. A person initially investigated for simple drug use may later face allegations involving transportation, brokerage, storage, or distribution depending on the evidence collected during the investigation. The distinction between personal use and distribution-related conduct can significantly affect sentencing outcomes under Korean criminal law. Early Legal Response Is More Important Than Ever In Korean drug cases, the initial statement given to investigators can have a major impact on the entire case. This becomes even more critical when undercover operations have already secured substantial evidence before the suspect is contacted. At that stage, legal strategy often focuses not only on the alleged conduct itself, but also on mitigating factors such as: Degree of involvement Whether the individual is a first-time offender Voluntary cooperation Admission of facts Rehabilitation and treatment efforts Lack of commercial intent Personal circumstances and background Because early statements can be difficult to reverse later, consulting a criminal defense lawyer before questioning is often extremely important. If You Have Been Contacted by Korean Investigators Drug investigations in Korea are becoming more sophisticated, technology-driven, and proactive. Undercover investigations may substantially increase the likelihood of evidence collection during online transactions and communication stages. In some situations, conduct initially believed to involve only personal use may later develop into broader allegations involving supply or facilitation. The criminal defense team at Decent Law Firm assists both Korean and foreign clients facing drug-related investigations in Korea, including investigation response strategy, interview preparation, evidence review, sentencing mitigation, and overall criminal defense representation. If you have been contacted by investigators or are facing a drug-related issue in Korea, seeking legal advice at an early stage may significantly affect the outcome of the case.
2026-05-15 -
Blogs
Pre-Trial Detention Hearing Strategy in Korea: Why You Need a Criminal Defense Lawyer Immediately
A detention warrant request is not the end of an investigation — in many cases, it is the moment that determines the direction of the entire criminal case. In Korea, once prosecutors request a detention warrant, the court usually conducts a pre-trial detention hearing within approximately 48 hours. What happens during this short window can significantly affect whether the suspect remains free or is taken into custody. Only 48 Hours to Prepare A Korean pre-trial detention hearing (often referred to as a warrant review hearing) is a procedure where a judge directly questions the suspect before deciding whether detention is necessary. Within this limited timeframe, the defense team must quickly: review the investigation status, meet the detained suspect, analyze statements and evidence, prepare written submissions, organize supporting materials, and develop a hearing strategy. In practice, many detention decisions are heavily influenced by the preparation completed before the hearing even begins. What Korean Courts Focus on in Detention Hearings Korean courts generally evaluate three core issues when deciding whether to issue a detention warrant. 1. Risk of Flight The court considers whether the suspect may avoid future investigation or trial proceedings. Stable residence, employment, family ties, and long-term connections to Korea can become important factors supporting release. 2. Risk of Evidence Tampering Judges also examine whether the suspect may destroy evidence, influence witnesses, or coordinate statements with related parties. If major evidence has already been secured and the suspect has cooperated with investigators, these points may help reduce concerns about detention necessity. 3. Seriousness of the Alleged Crime The court reviews the severity of the allegations, potential repeat offenses, financial damage, and overall case structure. At the same time, factors such as victim compensation efforts, settlement discussions, remorse, or legal disputes regarding the allegations may also be considered by the court. A criminal defense lawyer structures the defense strategy around these exact legal standards rather than relying on emotional appeals alone. A Detention Hearing Lawyer Does Much More Than Attend Court Effective defense in detention cases is usually built before the hearing date. ✔️ Immediate Client Interview and Statement Review The lawyer meets the suspect as quickly as possible to understand the case structure, prior statements made to investigators, and any inconsistencies or legal risks that may affect the hearing. ✔️ Written Opinions and Supporting Materials Defense counsel prepares written submissions explaining why detention is unnecessary. These materials may include: proof of residence, employment records, family relationship documents, medical conditions, cooperation history, transaction records, contracts, or communication evidence relevant to the allegations. The quality and organization of these submissions can directly affect the judge’s perception of the case. ✔️ Hearing Preparation and Statement Strategy During the hearing, suspects are questioned directly by the judge. Answers given during this process can significantly influence the outcome. An experienced lawyer helps prepare how key facts should be explained, which issues require caution, and how to maintain a consistent legal position throughout the hearing. ✔️ Planning for Possible Detention Even before the hearing concludes, the defense may also prepare follow-up measures such as detention review requests, bail applications, or additional legal filings if detention is ultimately granted. Early Defense Is Especially Important in Financial and Crypto-Related Cases Cases involving cryptocurrency, investment disputes, fraud allegations, voice phishing, OTC crypto transactions, or financial crimes are often highly technical and document-heavy. Simply claiming innocence is rarely enough. The defense must clearly explain transaction structures, fund flows, business relationships, and the suspect’s actual role in a way the court can realistically understand within a short hearing. In multi-party investigations, statements made by co-defendants or related individuals can also create additional risks at the detention stage. For foreign nationals living in Korea or international business operators, these risks may become even more serious due to language barriers, visa concerns, or misunderstandings regarding Korean criminal procedures. Detention Is Not a Conviction — But It Changes Everything A detention warrant does not mean guilt has been proven. However, actual detention can severely affect: preparation of the defense, business operations, employment, immigration status, family life, and psychological stability. There is a substantial practical difference between defending a criminal case while free and defending it while detained. If you have been contacted by Korean investigators or informed that a detention warrant may be requested, immediate legal review is strongly recommended. The criminal defense team at Decent Law Firm handles detention hearings, financial crime investigations, cryptocurrency-related criminal matters, and complex economic crime cases involving both Korean and foreign clients in Korea. Early action often shapes the outcome.
2026-05-14
