국문 KR 영문 EN

Current Trends in Unlisted Stock Investment Fraud

Unlisted shares are shares that are not traded on a public stock exchange. In Korea, these shares are often sold through private transactions, intermediaries, or over-the-counter channels. Because pricing information is not publicly available and the transaction process is often opaque, unlisted stock investments can easily become a source of fraud.

A common pattern involves inducing investors to pay large sums based on claims such as “the company will soon be listed” or “a KOSDAQ listing is imminent.” Victims often wait for years, believing that the listing has simply been delayed, and may not realize that they have been defrauded until much later.

Recently, fraud schemes have become more sophisticated. Rather than selling shares that do not exist, some perpetrators sell shares that actually exist but are of little value, inducing victims to purchase them at prices dozens of times higher than their real market value.

Because the shares themselves may exist, victims often find it difficult to recognize the fraud at an early stage.

This article explains the laws and court precedents that may apply to unlisted stock investment fraud in Korea, as well as the legal options available for recovering investment losses.
 

Applicable Laws

Several Korean laws may apply to unlisted stock investment fraud cases, depending on the facts, the amount of damage, and the role of each participant.
 

Depending on the scale of the damage and the manner of involvement, multiple charges may apply at the same time.
 

Key Factors in Determining Fraud

For fraud to be established in an unlisted stock investment case, the investigative authorities must examine whether there was deception and fraudulent intent at the time of the transaction.

The Supreme Court of Korea has held that:

“Unless the defendant confesses, fraudulent intent, which is a subjective element of fraud, must be determined by comprehensively considering objective circumstances such as the defendant’s financial condition before and after the act, the surrounding circumstances, the nature of the transaction, and the process of performance.”
— Supreme Court Decision 2015Do10570, December 27, 2019

In other words, even if the perpetrator claims that they genuinely believed the company would be listed, investigative authorities and courts may still find fraudulent intent based on objective facts, such as the company’s financial condition, false explanations, and how the investment funds were used.

In practice, investigators often focus on the following circumstances:

False listing schedule: whether the perpetrator stated a specific listing timeline despite the lack of any realistic basis.

Misuse of investment funds: whether the money was used for purposes different from what was promised to investors.

Impossibility of performance: whether it was impossible from the beginning to transfer the shares or perform the promised obligations.

Active involvement of intermediaries: whether an introducer or broker received commissions or directly participated in persuading the investor.

Fraud organizations may also attempt to avoid liability under the illegal fund-raising regulations by avoiding direct phrases such as “principal guarantee.” Instead, they may use indirect expressions such as “repurchase commitment if listing fails” or “compensation for the difference if the public offering price is lower than expected.”

Under Korean court practice, these types of clauses may still be interpreted as an agreement to preserve principal or profits under Article 2 of the Act on the Regulation of Conducting Fund-Raising Business Without Permission.
 

Legal Strategy for Recovering Investment Losses

Filing a criminal complaint does not automatically result in the recovery of the invested funds. In many cases, both criminal and civil procedures must be considered together.

A criminal complaint can be useful because it allows investigative authorities to trace the flow of funds and secure evidence through compulsory investigation. If search and seizure is conducted at an early stage, it may help identify relevant accounts and determine where the investment funds went.

Civil asset preservation measures, such as provisional attachment, are also important. These procedures are designed to freeze the perpetrator’s assets before they are disposed of or transferred. In many cases, filing for provisional attachment at the same time as, or shortly after, the criminal complaint can improve the possibility of recovery.

The likelihood of recovery usually depends on the following factors:

Assets held by the perpetrator: real estate, bank deposits, or other identifiable assets may be subject to provisional attachment.

Traceability of funds: clear bank transfer records and account flows can make recovery more realistic.

Scope of accomplices: if introducers, recruiters, or account holders were involved, it may be possible to pursue claims against those whose assets can be identified.

Timing of response: the earlier the response, the more legal options may remain before the perpetrator disappears or disposes of assets.

In unlisted stock investment fraud cases, the question is not only whether a criminal complaint can be filed. It is equally important to determine who should be targeted, what assets may be preserved, and which legal procedures should be pursued first.
 

Review by DECENT Law Firm’s Criminal Defense and Fraud Response Team

Unlisted stock investment fraud cases require a comprehensive legal review. The key issues include whether fraud can be established, whether accomplices can be identified, whether assets can be preserved, and how criminal and civil procedures should be coordinated.

DECENT Law Firm’s criminal defense and fraud response team has handled unlisted stock investment fraud cases from the criminal complaint stage through asset preservation and recovery strategy.

If your investment has not been returned, or if the person in charge has stopped responding, it is important to review your situation before more time passes.

This content is provided for general informational purposes only and does not constitute legal advice for any specific case.