-
BlogsEssential Steps If You Are Facing a Police Investigation for Drug Courier Charges
Your Initial Response Determines Your Future “We’d like you to come in as a witness for a brief statement.” These words from the police are never just a formality in drug-related cases. In the realm of narcotics investigations, a "witness interview" is often the final bridge before officially designating someone as a suspect. 1. The Reality of Being Contacted as a 'Drug Courier' If the police have reached out to you, it likely means you have already been identified through digital forensics, bank statements, or delivery invoices. The Turning Point: A single statement during your interview can instantly flip your status from a witness to a suspect. The Trap of 'Willful Blindness': Simply claiming "I didn't know" is rarely enough. Authorities will aggressively look for evidence of mens rea (criminal intent)—the idea that you should have suspected something was illegal. Risk of Emergency Arrest: While strictly regulated, if contradictions are found in your initial statement or if there is a perceived risk of destroying evidence, you could face an emergency arrest on the spot. 2. Why You Must Never Attend an Interview Alone Drug crimes carry significantly higher penalties than general criminal cases. Even for first-time offenders, the likelihood of imprisonment is high. Severe Penalties: Narcotics Control Act (Article 60): Transporting psychotropic drugs can lead to up to 10 years in prison or a fine of up to 100 million KRW. Act on Aggravated Punishment, etc. of Specific Crimes (Article 11): If the act was committed for profit, the penalty increases to life imprisonment or a minimum of 5 years. Admissibility of Statements: Phrases like "I don't recall clearly" are often documented as an "attempt to conceal the crime," becoming powerful evidence for conviction in court. The Danger of Accomplice Testimony: Narcotics rings often shift the blame onto couriers to protect higher-ups. Without a lawyer, it is nearly impossible to challenge the credibility of these conflicting testimonies. 3. [Checklist] 5 Things to Organize Before Your Interview Before stepping into a police station, you must review the facts based on objective evidence (messages, call logs, etc.): Category Key Details Contact Origin When, who, and via which platform (KakaoTalk, Telegram, etc.) contacted you? Task Description Specifically, what were you instructed to receive, deliver, or transfer? Compensation Did you receive a fee, cryptocurrency, or cash? How much was the total? Awareness of Content What were you told was inside the package? What did you honestly believe it was? Chronological Actions Have you mapped out your physical movements in order of time? 4. Immediate Actions to Take Deleting evidence or avoiding contact is the worst decision you can make. You must consult an expert attorney immediately to: Legal Diagnosis: Determine your current status and the actual risk of arrest. Statement Strategy: Design the most favorable scenario—whether to confess, deny, or partially admit. Exercising Rights: Strategically use your Right to Remain Silent to block unfavorable questioning. Counsel Attendance: Your lawyer will accompany you to the interview to prevent coercive questioning and review the official records in real-time. 5. Decent Law Firm’s Criminal Defense System In drug cases, speed and expertise are everything. Decent Law Firm operates a dedicated defense system to protect our clients' lives. In-depth Fact Analysis: We review all digital records before the interview to anticipate the prosecution’s strategy. Blocking Illegally Obtained Evidence: We aggressively challenge any procedural violations (e.g., coercive interrogation or illegal search and seizure). Proactive Mitigation: We prepare "sentencing factors" (e.g., letters of remorse, rehabilitation efforts) from the very beginning to minimize potential penalties. [Disclaimer] This content is for general informational purposes only and does not constitute legal advice. Every case is unique and requires a direct consultation with a qualified attorney. Have you been contacted by the police? Whether your situation is viewed as a 'simple errand' or 'criminal conspiracy' depends entirely on your first interview. Don’t wait until it’s too late. Would you like to schedule an English-speaking consultation or receive a preliminary assessment of your case?
2026-02-11 Naver Blog -
Blogs
How Should the Bithumb Bitcoin Erroneous Transfer Incident Be Viewed Legally?
Overview of the Incident A single input error resulted in an erroneous transfer worth approximately KRW 60 trillion. On February 6, 2026, an unprecedented incident occurred at Bithumb. Instead of distributing a promotional reward of KRW 2,000, a staff member mistakenly entered the unit incorrectly and transferred 2,000 Bitcoin. As a result, approximately KRW 196 billion per recipient was credited, and some of the Bitcoin was immediately sold on the market, causing a temporary sharp decline in prices. Although the incident originated from a system error, its impact extended far beyond an internal operational mistake and affected the broader market. Key Legal Issues The core legal issue in the Bithumb Bitcoin erroneous transfer incident lies in distinguishing criminal liability from civil liability. Many initially consider whether embezzlement charges could apply. However, according to the Supreme Court decision dated December 16, 2021 (2020Do9789), virtual assets are not considered “property” under the Criminal Act but rather “property-based interests.” The Court held that even if a person who receives mistakenly transferred virtual assets uses or disposes of them at their own discretion, it is difficult to conclude that such a person occupies a position of managing another’s affairs based on a fiduciary relationship. Accordingly, the offense of breach of trust does not apply. Therefore, merely receiving and using or disposing of virtual assets transferred by mistake does not easily lead to criminal punishment such as embezzlement or breach of trust under the current criminal law framework. However, the legal analysis does not end there. Assets acquired through the erroneous Bitcoin transfer constitute gains obtained without legal cause, and thus may be evaluated as unjust enrichment under the Civil Act. In such cases, the recipient bears an obligation to return the unjust enrichment regardless of intent or negligence. Even if part of the assets has already been disposed of, a recipient acting in bad faith must return the received benefits with interest and compensate for any resulting damages (Article 748(2) of the Civil Act). Since the obligation to return unjust enrichment does not have a fixed due date, the recipient becomes liable for delay damages from the time a demand for return is made (Article 387(2) of the Civil Act). Attorney’s Opinion “Although this incident originated from a system error, it will ultimately be resolved through restoration. Bithumb has sufficient recovery capabilities, and full recovery is legally possible. If any recipients are currently in discussions with Bithumb after receiving the erroneously transferred assets, returning them would be the prudent course of action to avoid unnecessary legal disputes. At this point, a rational resolution is necessary to preserve the integrity of the market.” Conclusion The outcome of this incident ultimately depends on the legal perspective applied. Decent Law Firm provides comprehensive legal analysis for recipients and related parties involved in large-scale virtual asset incidents such as the Bithumb Bitcoin erroneous transfer, including civil return procedures, negotiation processes, and dispute response strategies. By analyzing legal risks associated with different return methods, structuring negotiations with counterparties, and proposing response strategies to minimize additional damages, we aim to prevent disputes from escalating into prolonged litigation and to facilitate rational resolutions between the parties. The Bithumb Bitcoin erroneous transfer incident demonstrates how a technical mistake can quickly evolve into a serious legal issue. Only calm legal judgment and swift, well-informed responses can restore trust in the market. If you are a party with interests at stake in connection with the Bithumb Bitcoin erroneous transfer, a rational decision based on legal standards—rather than emotional judgment—is essential.
2026-02-09 Naver Blog -
Blogs
If You Need Help Reporting Unpaid Compensation as a Freelancer and Seeking Assistance from the Labor Office, Read This Carefully
Why Is Unpaid Compensation So Common for Freelancers? One of the most frequent problems freelancers face is the non-payment of service fees or compensation. Phrases such as “Let’s settle everything next month,” “The client hasn’t paid us yet,” or “The performance is unclear, so it’s hard to finalize the amount” come up repeatedly. Payment responsibility is often postponed on the grounds that the individual is “not an employee,” or work proceeds without a clearly defined payment structure from the outset. The absence of employment insurance or coverage under the four major social insurance schemes, combined with an environment where it feels difficult to raise issues about non-payment, makes freelancers even more vulnerable. At this stage, however, one point must be clearly understood. The root of the problem is not the freelancer’s status itself, but contracts and compensation structures that were disadvantageously designed from the beginning. Being a Freelancer Does Not Mean “Wages” Are Never Protected Many freelancers facing unpaid compensation conclude, “I’m not an employee, so I’m not protected.” However, legal determinations are not based on the title of the contract, but on the actual nature of the work relationship. Courts consider factors such as whether the user determined the content of the work and exercised substantial direction and supervision during its performance, whether working hours and locations were designated and binding, and whether the individual could independently operate a business—for example, by owning equipment or hiring third parties to perform the work. They also assess whether the compensation constitutes payment for the labor itself, whether a base or fixed salary was set, and whether there was continuity in the work relationship and exclusivity toward the user. When these elements are recognized, there are many cases where, despite a “freelancer” contract, worker status is acknowledged and the issue of unpaid service fees is treated as unpaid wages under the Labor Standards Act. Even if worker status is ultimately denied, that does not mean there is no way to respond. Claims can still be pursued as civil claims for unpaid service fees or compensation. The most dangerous decision is to prematurely rule out these possibilities on your own. Why Handling the Issue Alone Often Makes Things Worse for Freelancers When payment is withheld, emotions can easily take over. However, a single hastily sent message can put the entire response to unpaid freelancer compensation at a disadvantage. Such messages are often used to justify non-payment or are exploited as evidence to evade responsibility. Outcomes vary significantly depending on whether a payment date was specified, how performance-based clauses are interpreted, and what legal meaning is attributed to verbal agreements or messenger conversations. If handled incorrectly, freelancers may be directly exposed to arguments such as “the compensation was never agreed upon,” “performance was insufficient,” or “there is no obligation to pay due to contract termination.” This is not an issue an individual should be expected to endure alone. Without reassessing the underlying structure, unpaid compensation issues for freelancers tend to become prolonged. Decent Law Firm’s Approach to Handling Unpaid Compensation for Freelancers Decent Law Firm does not view unpaid freelancer compensation as a simple matter of payment demands. From the initial stage, we review both the contract and the actual work performed to conduct a detailed analysis of potential worker status. We systematically organize messenger records, emails, and past payment practices to prevent the formation of justifications for refusing payment. Where worker status is recognized, we pursue claims that include unpaid wages, severance pay, and statutory late payment interest (20% per annum under Article 37(1) of the Labor Standards Act and Article 17 of its Enforcement Decree). Where worker status is denied, we shift strategy to claims for unpaid service fees or damages under civil law. There is only one guiding principle. Whether the chosen approach makes it realistically possible to recover the money. If you are a freelancer losing sleep over this issue, remember clearly that you are not alone. If, on the other hand, you treat this matter lightly, even amounts that could have been recovered may be lost, and unpaid compensation can solidify into irreversible financial damage.
2026-02-06 Naver Blog -
Blogs
If You’re Curious About Debt Relief and Repayment Options for Crypto Loans, Read This Carefully
Why Crypto Loans Become Problematic in Rehabilitation and Bankruptcy Proceedings Crypto loans differ fundamentally from conventional personal loans or private lending, as the form of collateral and transaction pathways are often unclear or non-standard. In rehabilitation and bankruptcy practice, crypto loans typically fall into the following categories: Exchange-linked crypto loan products Private, peer-to-peer loans secured by crypto assets Loans provided through overseas crypto platforms Many debtors mistakenly assume that crypto-related debts do not need to be disclosed, or that overseas transactions fall outside Korean legal procedures. This assumption is highly risky. Once a debt is omitted, it may later be excluded from discharge and continue to survive. Moreover, if the integrity of the procedure is compromised, courts are more likely to dismiss the case or deny discharge. From the moment a debtor makes unilateral judgments, the case can begin to move in an unfavorable direction. How Crypto Loans Are Treated in Rehabilitation and Bankruptcy Whether a crypto loan is recognized as a valid debt depends on the legal structure of the loan and the flow of funds. Where crypto assets were provided as collateral, courts must assess whether the collateral arrangement can be legally recognized as a secured claim under the Debtor Rehabilitation and Bankruptcy Act (such as a rehabilitation secured claim or a separately satisfied claim). If the collateral structure is not legally valid, the debt is treated as a general rehabilitation claim or bankruptcy claim. In addition, the timing and method used to assess the market value of crypto assets are critical in determining the debtor’s asset pool. Price volatility and whether the crypto collateral has already been liquidated directly affect the feasibility of a rehabilitation repayment plan. In bankruptcy cases, further issues may arise, including: Whether repayments or collateral provided to specific creditors prior to filing are subject to avoidance actions under Articles 391–407 of the Debtor Rehabilitation and Bankruptcy Act Procedural complications in claim verification and distribution involving overseas creditors In practice, many debtors become worse off not because of the amount of debt itself, but because the handling of crypto loans is legally flawed. Key Issues That Must Be Addressed When You Have Crypto Loans The reason crypto loan transactions and borrowing relationships must never be concealed is straightforward. Courts determine whether to approve a rehabilitation plan or grant a discharge based on the accuracy and completeness of the debtor’s asset and creditor disclosures (Articles 147, 148, and 564(1)(3) of the Debtor Rehabilitation and Bankruptcy Act). Accordingly, full and accurate disclosure of all assets and liabilities is mandatory. When properly organized documentation is submitted, proceedings tend to progress in a stable and predictable manner. Conversely, if the initial approach is incorrect, corrective orders are repeatedly issued, the risk of dismissal increases, and both time and costs escalate unnecessarily. At this stage, the debtor’s response strategy—and whether professional guidance is involved—often determines the outcome. For many individuals losing sleep over crypto loan issues, proper legal handling is the first step toward regaining stability. How Decent Law Firm Handles Rehabilitation and Bankruptcy Cases Involving Crypto Loans Decent Law Firm approaches crypto loan cases by first restructuring the underlying transaction framework to align with court standards. We develop tailored response strategies based on loan type—exchange-linked products, overseas platforms, or private lending—and adjust for crypto holdings, liquidation timing, and market volatility so these factors do not negatively affect the procedure. Our assistance goes far beyond administrative filing. We provide strategy-driven legal handling designed to proactively prevent dismissal or denial of discharge. Rather than concluding that “crypto loans make rehabilitation impossible,” we focus on how crypto loans must be handled to make rehabilitation or bankruptcy legally viable. If crypto-related debts and assets are not accurately identified and properly addressed, they can materially undermine plan approval or discharge decisions. For this reason, a structured and professional response from the earliest stage is essential. Having crypto loans does not make rehabilitation or bankruptcy impossible. However, improper handling can make it impossible. You do not need to carry that risk alone—Decent Law Firm provides the legal strategy and response needed to navigate crypto loan issues effectively.
2026-02-06 Naver Blog -
Blogs
Is Crypto Referral Legal? Why Financial Authority Press Releases Are Not Enough
Following a recent press release by the Financial Services Commission (FSC), inquiries regarding the legality of crypto referral programs have increased significantly. Many businesses that use exchange referral codes for marketing, investment advisory services, or community operations are now concerned about potential violations of the Act on Reporting and Using Specified Financial Transaction Information (the “AML Act”). However, the legality of crypto referral programs cannot be determined solely based on an FSC press release. In practice, legal assessments must take into account the statutory provisions of the AML Act, relevant court decisions, and investigative standards applied by law enforcement authorities. The Meaning and Limitations of the FSC Press Release In its press release, the FSC suggested that certain referral structures could constitute brokerage or intermediary activities involving virtual asset exchanges. It is important to note, however, that this position reflects an administrative interpretation, not a binding judicial ruling or settled legal doctrine. When legal liability is at issue, courts ultimately determine—on a case-by-case basis—whether a specific referral structure satisfies the statutory elements of a regulated virtual asset service provider under the AML Act. Accordingly, it is legally inappropriate to conclude that all referral programs are unlawful based solely on regulatory commentary. The Core Legal Issue Under the AML Act Article 7 of the AML Act imposes reporting obligations on virtual asset service providers. The key question is whether a referral program goes beyond simple advertising or promotion and instead constitutes the business of brokering or intermediating the purchase, sale, or exchange of virtual assets. In making this determination, authorities focus not on the mere use of referral codes, but on substantive factors such as whether the operator intervenes in transaction structures, influences investment decisions, controls the flow of funds, or effectively forces users to use a specific exchange. Absent these elements, referral activities are generally viewed as marketing rather than brokerage. Guidance from Court Decisions and Investigative Practice Court rulings and multiple non-indictment decisions indicate a consistent approach: referral programs are often characterized as marketing arrangements provided by exchanges, carried out based on users’ voluntary choices. Where the operator does not execute trades, handle customer funds, or mandate the use of a specific exchange, it is difficult to classify such activities as regulated virtual asset services. In practice, investigative authorities tend to focus less on the existence of a referral program itself and more on whether it is combined with fraudulent conduct, unregistered business operations, or substantive involvement in investment decisions. Key Considerations for Crypto Referral Businesses That said, not all referral structures are risk-free. Legal concerns may arise where a business repeatedly promotes only a single exchange, excludes alternative options, or combines referral activities with investment guidance that materially affects users’ decisions. In such cases, the activity may be viewed as de facto brokerage or intermediation. Ultimately, the legality of a crypto referral program depends not on its label, but on whether the overall business structure can be legally justified under the AML Act. Businesses that currently operate referral programs—or are considering implementing them—should carefully assess their structure before regulatory or investigative issues arise. Decent Law Firm’s Digital Asset Team provides legal opinions on the compliance of crypto referral structures, evaluates AML Act risks, and assists clients in preparing for potential regulatory or investigative scrutiny. Crypto referrals are not simply a question of “legal or illegal,” but whether the structure can be clearly explained and defended under the law. If you require a legal review of your crypto referral business model, consulting experienced legal professionals at an early stage can be a critical step in risk management.
2026-02-04 Naver Blog -
Blogs
If You Need Help Understanding the Meaning, Timeline, and Supreme Court Precedents on Lawsuits to Confirm Worker Status
Why Lawsuits to Confirm Worker Status Matter Even when contracts are signed under labels such as “freelancer,” “outsourcing,” or “independent contractor,” the first and most critical issue in a dispute is whether the individual legally qualifies as a “worker.” A lawsuit to confirm worker status is the procedure that definitively resolves this issue, and it serves as the starting point for all subsequent legal determinations, including wages, severance pay, the legality of dismissal, and entitlement to social insurance. Once worker status is recognized, the protective provisions of the Labor Standards Act—covering wages, severance pay, and restrictions on dismissal—apply retroactively. As a result, previously unsettled rights and obligations are determined all at once (Article 2(1)1 of the Labor Standards Act). This makes the issue a source of real protection for one party and, at the same time, a significant legal burden for the other. Above all, if the initial approach is misdirected, it can lead to legal risks that are difficult to remedy later. For this reason, the issue must never be approached lightly. How Courts Determine Worker Status When determining whether an individual qualifies as a worker, courts do not focus on the form or title of the contract. Instead, they examine the substance of the working relationship—specifically, whether the individual provided labor to the employer in a subordinate relationship for the purpose of receiving wages. In practice, courts comprehensively consider economic and social factors such as: Whether the employer determines the content of the work and exercises substantial direction and supervision over how it is performed Whether the employer designates working hours and the workplace, and whether the individual is bound by such designation Whether the individual can independently operate a business at their own expense and responsibility Whether the individual bears the risks of profit and loss arising from the provision of labor Whether the remuneration constitutes compensation for the labor itself Whether a base salary or fixed compensation is set, and whether wage income tax is withheld The continuity of the working relationship and the degree of exclusivity toward the employer Whether the individual is recognized as a worker under social security systems That said, factors such as the existence of a fixed salary, withholding of wage income tax, or recognition under social insurance schemes are matters the employer—often in a stronger economic position—can unilaterally determine. Therefore, worker status should not be easily denied based on these factors alone. In short, no single element is determinative. The key lies in assessing the overall structure and substance of the working relationship. Practical Issues That Commonly Arise in Disputes In lawsuits to confirm worker status, the burden of proving worker status generally lies with the individual asserting it (Supreme Court Decision dated June 25, 2020, Case No. 2020Da207864). Accordingly, it is essential to secure concrete evidence that demonstrates actual working conditions and the existence of direction and supervision. In practice, claims for unpaid wages or severance pay are often combined with a worker status confirmation claim. If worker status is recognized, rights are applied retroactively, which can significantly expand the scope of the dispute and the associated risks. As a result, the later a strategic approach is taken, the greater the financial and legal burden becomes for the parties involved. Decent Law Firm’s Approach to Lawsuits Confirming Worker Status In lawsuits to confirm worker status, the most important task is not merely asserting that worker status exists, but proving—through concrete facts—that the substance of the labor relationship constitutes a relationship of subordination to the employer. Decent Law Firm approaches these cases by focusing on the actual substance of the working relationship, rather than the form or title of the contract, and by structuring the facts in a way that allows the court to make a clear legal determination. We also view worker status confirmation lawsuits not as isolated win-or-lose cases, but as the starting point of the entire dispute. In doing so, we comprehensively assess the client’s situation and the potential legal risks that may arise after the judgment, and set a strategy aimed at minimizing burdens that could extend beyond the outcome itself. A lawsuit to confirm worker status is a procedure that should never be taken lightly. This is precisely why professional legal assistance is essential from the initial planning stage onward.
2026-02-03 Naver Blog
