-
Blogs CryptoCrypto SNS Promotion—Accomplice Risk? Korea Virtual Asset Law Guide
What You Must Know Before Your First Investigation Since the enforcement of Korea’s Virtual Asset User Protection Act, regulatory scrutiny over crypto-related activities has intensified significantly. As a result, individuals involved in meme coins, altcoins, and DeFi projects—often in limited roles—are increasingly being called in for investigation. A key trend is that even those who did not lead or design a project, but only handled SNS marketing, community management, or translation, are sometimes booked as accomplices. What Conduct Is Considered Illegal? The Act broadly regulates unfair trading practices in virtual assets. In practice, the following types of conduct frequently become legal issues: Market Manipulation: Artificial trading volume, bot-driven buy/sell activity False or Misleading Disclosures: Spreading exaggerated or false “positive news” through SNS or communities Rug Pull Schemes: Pre-acquiring tokens and selling them after attracting investors Engagement Manipulation: Inflating followers or transaction metrics Use of Insider Information: Trading based on non-public listing or project information In many cases, multiple charges—such as fraud, unfair trade practices, and insider trading—are applied together. “I Only Did Marketing—Why Am I Being Treated as an Accomplice?” This is one of the most common questions in crypto investigations. Even if you did not understand the full structure of the project or earned minimal compensation, authorities may still view your actions as part of a broader scheme to induce investment. Activities such as managing SNS accounts, posting promotional content, or maintaining community engagement can be interpreted as contributing to the overall transaction structure. The key legal issue is intent (knowledge and awareness): Did you recognize the illegality of the conduct? Were you aware that the project structure was deceptive or unsustainable? Did you understand how tokens were distributed and monetized? Your level of awareness can significantly affect how your involvement is legally assessed. Situations That Require Immediate Legal Review You should seek legal advice promptly if any of the following apply: You joined a crypto project through personal connections and handled SNS, marketing, or translation You posted promotional or investor-attracting content on official channels You received tokens or cash as compensation You cut off contact after fraud allegations surfaced or have already been contacted by investigators Even one of these factors may expose you to legal risk under Korean law. If an Arrest Warrant Is Filed Crypto-related cases rely heavily on digital evidence, including blockchain transaction records, SNS activity logs, and mobile forensic data. When a warrant is reviewed, courts consider: Risk of evidence destruction Risk of flight Seriousness of the alleged offense Your specific role and level of involvement The time between a warrant request and the court hearing is extremely short. During this window, it is critical to clearly organize and present your actual level of involvement and lack of intent. Why Crypto Cases Require Specialized Legal Counsel Crypto investigations involve both legal and technical complexity. Without a clear understanding of blockchain transactions, token distribution mechanisms, and smart contract structures, even the factual analysis of a case can be flawed. At Decent Law Firm, our digital asset team provides end-to-end representation, including: Early-stage investigation response and strategy Police and prosecutor interview preparation Arrest warrant hearing defense Full trial representation Our approach goes beyond simple denial. We focus on demonstrating the absence of intent and clarifying the actual scope of involvement through structured legal defense. If you or someone close to you is under investigation, early legal intervention is essential. In crypto-related cases, the outcome is often shaped at the very beginning.
2026-04-28 Naver Blog -
Blogs Crypto
Cryptocurrency Delisting by Korean Exchanges: What Projects Should Check First
1. Practical Risks of Delisting for Crypto Projects A trading support termination (delisting) by a Korean cryptocurrency exchange is a critical event that can affect both the sustainability of the project and the protection of its investors. Recently, as major Korean exchanges have increasingly designated tokens as “investment caution” and proceeded with delistings, legal disputes initiated by project teams have also been on the rise. From a practical standpoint, delisting is far more than simply losing access to one exchange. Once trading support is terminated, liquidity drops sharply, often leading to a significant decline in asset value. At the same time, investor confidence deteriorates, which can delay or even derail fundraising efforts and strategic partnerships. In many cases, community disengagement follows, threatening the sustainability of the entire ecosystem. 2. Key Legal Issue: Transparency and Predictability of the Process In practice, the main legal challenge is not just the delisting decision itself, but the process leading up to it. Projects frequently raise concerns that exchanges do not provide clear or measurable criteria for maintaining listings after an “investment caution” designation. Even when projects submit requested materials and explanations, some report receiving delisting notices without detailed feedback or meaningful communication. While exchanges are generally granted broad discretion in listing and delisting decisions, that discretion is not unlimited. If the decision-making process appears arbitrary or inconsistent with contractual terms and exchange policies, it may give rise to legal disputes. Ultimately, the key legal questions are whether the procedure was properly followed and whether the decision was reasonable. 3. Legal Remedy: Injunction to Suspend Delisting In response to delisting notices, project teams are increasingly moving beyond public statements and considering formal legal action. One of the primary legal tools is an injunction to suspend the effectiveness of the delisting decision. This allows the project to request that the court temporarily halt the delisting until a final judgment is made. If granted, trading support may continue during the litigation period. However, Korean courts tend to recognize the broad discretion of exchanges in selecting and maintaining listed assets. As a result, injunctions are typically granted only when there are clear procedural defects or evidence of abuse of discretion. This makes it essential for projects to rely on well-organized evidence and legal arguments, rather than general claims or public pressure. 4. Essential Checklist After Receiving a Delisting Notice Upon receiving a delisting notice, projects should immediately organize key materials to establish a legal basis for their position. These include: Listing agreements and trading support contracts Exchange terms of service and listing/maintenance/delisting policies Records of prior “investment caution” designations and responses Documentation of business progress and roadmap execution Compliance efforts, technical development, and security measures Investor protection policies and actions taken Having these materials prepared is crucial not only for negotiations with the exchange but also for any legal proceedings, including injunction filings. 5. Three Critical Points to Review Immediately Delisting cases are highly time-sensitive. Projects should focus on the following: Procedural validity: Was the delisting decision made in accordance with contractual terms and exchange rules? Communication process: Were the exchange’s requirements clearly communicated, and did the project respond adequately? Timing for legal action: Is there sufficient time to file for an injunction before the delisting takes effect? These factors will determine whether negotiation or legal action is the more effective strategy. 6. Early Strategy Determines the Outcome Cryptocurrency delisting disputes require both legal expertise and a deep understanding of the technical and regulatory landscape. Decent Law Firm has advised numerous crypto projects on listing-related legal opinions, regulatory compliance under Korean law (including AML and reporting obligations), and dispute resolution. Our approach focuses on aligning legal strategy with the operational realities of blockchain projects. If your project has received a delisting notice and is facing business or reputational risks, an early legal assessment can significantly impact the outcome. Organizing key facts and seeking timely advice is critical.
2026-04-24 Naver Blog -
Blogs Crypto
Criminal Liability for Crypto OTC Transactions in Korea: Proceeds of Crime Concealment & Defense Strategy
“I just sold crypto and received cash.” In practice, this explanation is no longer sufficient to avoid criminal liability in Korea. According to data released by the Korea Customs Service and the Financial Intelligence Unit (FIU) in February 2026, illegal foreign exchange transactions (“hwanchigi”) over the past five years reached KRW 11.5 trillion, with approximately 83% (KRW 9.5 trillion) involving virtual assets. In 2025 alone, suspicious transaction reports (STRs) related to money laundering hit a record high of 1.3 million cases, increasing by 300,000 compared to the previous year. A pending 2026 amendment to Korea’s Anti-Money Laundering regime is expected to expand the Travel Rule to transactions under KRW 1 million and grant the FIU authority to freeze suspicious accounts. Even small OTC crypto transactions are now actively monitored and traceable. 1. How the Act on Concealment of Criminal Proceeds Applies to Crypto OTC Transactions In practice, prosecutions typically arise through the following structures: ▪ Receiving USDT from non-residents and paying KRW domestically This structure may trigger both violations of the Foreign Exchange Transactions Act and the Act on Regulation and Punishment of Criminal Proceeds Concealment. Even if it appears to be a simple exchange service, it can be treated as illegal remittance or money laundering. ▪ “Lack of knowledge” is not always a valid defense Even if the party claims they did not know the counterparty was involved in criminal activity, courts may infer knowledge based on transaction size, frequency, and the use of cash. Korean courts increasingly apply a “should have known” standard based on objective circumstances. ▪ Even intermediary roles can lead to criminal liability Individuals who only handled KRW transfers—without directly trading crypto—have been convicted as accomplices if their actions contributed to the concealment or transfer of criminal proceeds. The key issue is not the form of the transaction, but the overall structure and role within the flow of funds. 2. Penalties — Multiple Laws Apply Simultaneously Crypto OTC cases in Korea rarely involve a single charge. The following statutes are often applied in parallel: ▪ Unregistered Virtual Asset Business (VASP) – Act on Reporting and Use of Certain Financial Transaction Information → Up to 5 years imprisonment or a fine up to KRW 50 million ▪ Acquisition, possession, or disposal of criminal proceeds – Act on Concealment of Criminal Proceeds → Up to 5 years imprisonment or a fine up to KRW 30 million ▪ Unreported foreign exchange transactions – Foreign Exchange Transactions Act → Up to 3 years imprisonment or a fine up to KRW 300 million ▪ Confiscation and forfeiture → Full confiscation or preservation of assets related to criminal proceeds Because these laws can be applied cumulatively, underestimating exposure based on a single charge can lead to serious misjudgment of legal risk. 3. Real Case — KRW 580 Billion OTC Operation Leading to Indictment In a recent case, the operator of an unregistered crypto OTC business was indicted and detained for transactions totaling approximately KRW 580 billion. The case involved the laundering of KRW 23.5 billion in proceeds from crypto fraud, which were used to purchase real estate under borrowed names. Authorities imposed asset preservation measures to secure confiscation. Notably, individuals who did not directly commit fraud but participated in the money flow structure were also prosecuted. The argument that “I only facilitated transfers” was rejected by the court. 4. Defense Strategy — Varies by Investigation Stage Early response is critical in these cases, and the strategy must be tailored to each stage: ▪ Account Freeze Stage Immediate legal review is required to assess grounds for lifting the freeze and limiting asset preservation. Delays can significantly expand the scope of frozen assets. ▪ Summons (Witness/Suspect Stage) Attending an interview alone and providing unstructured answers is highly risky. Statements should be prepared in advance with counsel, focusing on transaction details and knowledge of fund origins. ▪ Submission of Transaction Records Submitting records without legal review may expose unnecessary risks. The scope, format, and explanation of submitted materials should be strategically controlled. A misstep in early statements can directly affect indictment decisions, detention, and confiscation scope. These cases often involve both administrative sanctions and criminal proceedings, requiring a dual-track defense approach. 5. Frequently Asked Questions Q. I only sold crypto and received cash. Can I still be punished? Yes. Depending on the structure, frequency, and source of funds, the transaction may be classified as illegal remittance or money laundering—even if it appears to be a simple sale. Q. I didn’t know the counterparty was involved in crime. Lack of knowledge is a key defense, but authorities often argue that you “should have known” based on objective circumstances. Early legal strategy is essential. Q. What should I do if my account is frozen? You should immediately review the legal basis and explore options for lifting the freeze. Timing is critical. Legal Guidance for Crypto OTC Cases in Korea If you have received notice of an account freeze or contact from an investigative authority, your initial response can significantly impact the outcome. Decent Law Firm’s Digital Asset Team has extensive experience handling crypto OTC, illegal remittance, and USDT-related money laundering cases. Our approach goes beyond criminal defense—we analyze transaction structures and fund flows to build a comprehensive strategy.
2026-04-23 Naver Blog -
Blogs Crypto
Crypto API Trading in Korea: Unfair Trading Risks & Regulatory Response Guide
On April 13, 2026, the Financial Supervisory Service (FSS) officially disclosed cases of unfair trading involving crypto API transactions. With approximately 30% of total crypto trading volume now executed via APIs, regulatory scrutiny is increasingly focused on this segment. A common misconception is that using an automated trading program limits personal liability. However, even if trades are executed by an algorithm, legal responsibility remains with the individual who configured and operated the system. Key Unfair Trading Patterns Identified by Korean Regulators The cases identified by the FSS reflect classic market manipulation behaviors that may lead to criminal liability under Korean law. Repeated Small-Volume Trades Executing frequent buy and sell orders in small amounts to artificially inflate trading volume. Spoofing (Order Placement and Cancellation) Placing buy orders and repeatedly canceling them to create a false impression of strong market demand. Wash Trading Across Multiple Accounts Using multiple accounts to trade with oneself in order to simulate market activity or influence price movement. Layering with High-Price Orders Continuously placing buy orders at higher prices to drive the market price upward toward a target level. Importantly, under Korean Supreme Court standards, liability may arise even without actual price impact—mere potential to manipulate the market can be sufficient. This means that even pre-built or third-party trading algorithms may expose users to legal risks if such patterns are executed. Legal Risks Often Overlooked by API Trading Users The Financial Supervisory Service has made it clear that automation does not eliminate accountability. In practice, liability may arise in the following situations: Using trading scripts or bot code obtained from online communities or social media API key leakage allowing third parties to execute unlawful trades under your account Participating—knowingly or unknowingly—in coordinated trading patterns that influence market prices Under the Act on the Protection of Virtual Asset Users, penalties can be severe. Depending on the scale of illicit gains, sanctions may include long-term imprisonment, reflecting the seriousness of such violations. How to Respond if Contacted by the FSS Crypto exchanges in Korea operate automated surveillance systems to detect abnormal trading activity. These findings are reported to the Financial Supervisory Service, and once flagged, a regulatory review may begin. If you are contacted, it is critical to understand that this is not a routine inquiry but the early stage of a formal investigation. ✔️ Request for Transaction Records Do not submit materials without prior legal review. Over-disclosure may broaden the scope of suspicion. ✔️ Request for Appearance or Interview You should attend with legal counsel and prepare a clear, consistent explanation of your trading strategy and system configuration. ✔️ Account Freeze An account freeze is typically a signal that the matter has escalated to a criminal investigation phase. Administrative sanctions and criminal proceedings may proceed in parallel. How Decent Law Firm Approaches These Cases Decent Law Firm’s Digital Asset Team handles cases involving API trading, market manipulation allegations, and violations of Korean crypto regulations. Our approach goes beyond standard defense. We analyze transaction data to identify risk patterns, distinguish between automated execution and user intent, and structure a defense strategy that clearly defines the scope of liability. We also ensure consistency from the earliest stage—especially in document submission and initial statements—so that legal risks do not escalate unnecessarily. If you have been contacted by regulators or are concerned about potential exposure, early-stage legal review is critical. Even if your situation is not fully organized, an initial assessment can significantly impact the outcome.
2026-04-22 Naver Blog -
Blogs Crypto
Korea FSS Cracks Down on Finfluencers: What KOLs Need to Know About Legal Risk
Korea's Financial Regulator Is Now Actively Targeting Finfluencers Korea's Financial Supervisory Service (FSS) has confirmed illegal activity across five YouTube channels offering paid stock recommendations and automated trading programs, and has announced it will refer the operators for criminal investigation. The finfluencer and KOL market in Korea has effectively entered a period of full regulatory scrutiny. Four of the five channels identified were found to have provided investment advice and recommendations without registering as quasi-investment advisory businesses, in potential violation of the Financial Investment Services and Capital Markets Act (FSCMA). Three of them charged tiered subscription fees ranging from approximately $2 to $450 per month for stock analysis and picks, while a fourth recommended entry and exit timing for leveraged U.S. ETFs. A fifth operator was flagged for selling an automated stock trading program without the required investment discretionary business license. The FSS has stated it will refer unregistered financial investment operators for criminal investigation and has indicated that front-running and other market manipulation activities will be pursued by its special judicial police unit. Legal Risks by Service Type ① Quasi-Investment Advisory Registration Risk (Paid Recommendations & Tip Services) If you operate a paid stock tip channel or recommendation service and collect regular subscription fees or tiered membership dues, your business may be subject to quasi-investment advisory registration requirements under the FSCMA. Describing your content as "information sharing" does not provide legal protection — regulators assess how the service actually functions. ② Unlicensed Investment Discretionary Business Risk (Automated Trading Bots & Signals) If your automated trading bot or signal service effectively executes or directs trades on behalf of subscribers, it may fall within the scope of investment discretionary business, which requires a formal license. As this latest crackdown demonstrates, operating without the required license carries serious criminal exposure. ③ Front-Running and Undisclosed Advertising Risk Recommending products or securities while in an undisclosed paid or sponsored relationship may violate both advertising disclosure laws and FSCMA investment solicitation rules. Recommending securities you already hold with the intent to sell after the price rises can constitute market manipulation, and the FSS has made clear it intends to pursue these cases aggressively. If Any of These Apply to You, Your Business May Already Be at Risk You should seek legal advice immediately if any of the following describe your situation. You operate a paid stock recommendation or tip service You sell or license an automated trading bot or signal subscription You have affiliate or sponsorship relationships with ETF, crypto, or platform providers but your disclosure practices are unclear You have seen a recent increase in refund requests or customer complaints You have received any inquiry or document request from a financial regulator or investigative authority Once a referral for criminal investigation is initiated, the consequences — channel suspension, account freezes, and criminal liability — can materialize simultaneously. A brief legal review now can prevent a far larger problem later. 5 Things You Should Review Right Now First, clarify the legal classification of your business. Whether your service constitutes simple information provision, quasi-investment advisory, or investment discretionary business has significant legal consequences — and the answer depends on how your service actually operates, not how it is labeled. Second, review your Terms of Service, disclaimer language, and product descriptions for compliance with the FSCMA, the E-Commerce Act, and the Act on Regulation of Terms and Conditions. A generic disclaimer stating that users are responsible for their own investment decisions is not sufficient protection. Third, establish internal guidelines for advertising, sponsorship, and affiliate disclosures. Conflict of interest disclosure standards and revenue-sharing transparency should be defined at the content planning stage, not added as an afterthought. Fourth, if you operate a paid community on Telegram, KakaoTalk, or Discord, document the permitted scope of content, as well as your refund and cancellation process. Clear internal rules significantly reduce the risk of disputes and regulatory complaints. Fifth, build pre-launch legal review into your routine before releasing new services, changing your fee structure, or entering into significant partnerships. Decent Law Firm's Virtual Asset Team Is Here to Help Finfluencer and KOL businesses sit at the intersection of content regulation, marketing law, community management, investment advisory rules, and platform compliance. Managing these risks requires a perspective that spans financial regulation, capital markets law, platform liability, and criminal exposure — general contract review alone is not enough. Decent Law Firm's Virtual Asset Team provides tailored legal services covering business structure assessment, compliant model design, Terms of Service and advertising guideline review, and dispute and investigation response. If you are uncertain whether your current business structure is legally sound, contact Decent Law Firm today.
2026-04-13 Naver Blog -
Blogs Crypto
USD.AI Private Sale Crypto Scam: What Victims in Korea Need to Know
Reports of fraudulent cryptocurrency investment schemes involving AI-branded coins and private sale offers have been rising sharply in Korea. While these schemes market themselves around whitelists, private sale allocations, and early investor exclusivity, the underlying pattern is consistent: victims are directed to send Ethereum or other assets to a private wallet, after which the operators disappear. The AI Angle: How These Scams Hook Investors Scam operators behind schemes like USD.AI deliberately attach AI or cutting-edge technology to their project names, knowing these terms generate interest and lower skepticism. Through Telegram groups, Discord servers, and social media influencers, victims are approached with phrases like "whitelist selection" and "limited early investor allocation." The scheme typically builds credibility by claiming upcoming listings on major global exchanges or launches on well-known launchpad platforms, framing the private sale as exclusive internal inventory not available to the general public. Victims are then directed to send funds to a specific wallet address. Amounts start small, but the pressure to send larger sums builds steadily as the operators emphasize projected returns and listing excitement. How Technical Language Is Weaponized What makes this type of fraud particularly dangerous is the deliberate misuse of blockchain terminology to confuse and mislead investors who are unfamiliar with how these networks actually work. Common claims include: "Your assets are frozen in the contract because you didn't set the correct GWEI value," "GWEI in this project is not a gas fee but a project-specific parameter — entering the wrong number breaks the vesting," and "Sending the same amount again will merge with the locked transaction and release your funds." None of this reflects how Ethereum or standard smart contracts actually function. These explanations are constructed for a single purpose: to convince you to send more money by making it seem like your original funds are recoverable with one more transfer. Psychological Pressure Tactics • Time pressure: Phrases like "the reward period ends today" or "you'll lose your allocation if you don't send now" are designed to prevent calm decision-making. • Impersonation: Scammers produce convincing fake screenshots of Upbit announcements, global exchange listings, or launchpad pages to make the project appear legitimate and already verified. • Fear tactics: Warnings such as "if you don't resolve this now, your entire investment will be wiped out" are used to push victims into making additional transfers while panicked. Warning Signs to Watch For Any claim that your assets are locked due to an incorrect GWEI setting, or that resending the same amount will unlock a previous transaction, should be treated as an immediate red flag. Legitimate exchanges and verified projects never ask you to send funds directly to a private wallet address in a one-on-one conversation. Phrases like "act today or lose everything" or "resend to recover your funds" are textbook signals of an ongoing scam. If anything feels off, stop all transfers immediately and preserve everything — chat logs, wallet addresses, and transaction records. If You Suspect You've Been Targeted, Act Now Decent Law Firm's dedicated cryptocurrency team advises on criminal and civil matters involving virtual assets, blockchain disputes, and suspected investment fraud in Korea. If you are being pressured to send additional funds or believe you have already been defrauded in a private sale scheme, timing matters — delayed action allows the damage to grow. Contact Decent Law Firm to have your transaction history and the fraud structure analyzed, and to build a practical response strategy before further losses occur. We know the answer.
2026-04-02 Naver Blog -
Blogs Crypto
Illegal Investment Advisory Fraud in Korea: The Longer You Wait, the Less Likely You Are to Recover Your Money
Reports of fraud involving unlicensed investment advisory services — operating through KakaoTalk group chats, Telegram channels, and YouTube — are increasing rapidly. What appears on the surface to be legitimate investment advice is frequently a structure in which an unregistered operator collects high fees while generating losses for clients. When fraud of this kind occurs, failing to pursue both criminal complaint and civil recovery strategy from the outset means that with every passing day, the money, the evidence, and the perpetrators become harder to find. When Does Unlicensed Investment Advisory Become a Legal Problem? Unlicensed investment advisory services differ from properly registered advisory firms in that they provide investment information to an unspecified number of people through standardized channels in exchange for payment. The problem arises when operators go beyond this — effectively directing specific buy and sell decisions on individual stocks — without any license or registration, and accepting no responsibility for investment losses. Common characteristics include the following. Specific stock recommendations and buy/sell timing instructions delivered through KakaoTalk or Telegram group chats, text messages, or YouTube High fees charged under the guise of monthly membership, access rights, or performance commissions Exaggerated past return figures and repeated use of fabricated profit verification images When losses occur, telling clients to deposit more money with promises that losses can be recovered At this point, the conduct may already give rise to criminal fraud charges, violations of the Financial Investment Services and Capital Markets Act, and violations of the Act on the Regulation of Similar Receiving of Funds. Why a Criminal Complaint Should Come First Many victims' instinct is to begin with a refund request or a formal letter of demand. However, a significant number of unlicensed advisory operators use borrowed corporate identities or accounts registered in other people's names, repeatedly dissolve and re-establish entities, and move funds through overseas servers or cryptocurrency — all designed to make tracing extremely difficult. For this reason, where losses have reached a meaningful level, filing a criminal complaint promptly is the most effective way to compel investigators to trace account flows, identify co-conspirators, and prevent further harm to other victims. Securing the suspect's financial records, communications history, and immigration records through the criminal process also creates a significantly stronger position for any subsequent civil litigation or settlement negotiation. Preparing for a Criminal Complaint: What to Gather If you are seriously considering filing a complaint, organizing the following materials in advance will make the process considerably more effective. • How you were recruited: when you joined, and what advertisement or referral led you to the service • Conversation records: complete screenshots of group chat and one-on-one messages, particularly any statements guaranteeing returns or directing specific trades • Transaction records: all payment records for fees and commissions, including transfer confirmations showing the recipient account details • Trading history: the stocks recommended by the operator and your actual buy and sell records, along with the total loss incurred • Other victims: information about others who joined through the same channel or participated in the same group (important for coordinated complaints) This material gives investigators a concrete basis for understanding the structure of the operation and assessing whether fraud or unlicensed advisory activity occurred. Decent Law Firm's Digital Asset Team Allowing time to pass when losses have already occurred only benefits the other side. Detailed criminal complaint drafting: We identify and build the case for every applicable charge — including fraud and unlicensed fund solicitation — beyond the base Capital Markets Act violation, with the goal of securing a strong investigative response. Parallel civil recovery strategy: Alongside the criminal complaint, we pursue civil measures including provisional attachment and damages claims to freeze remaining assets and maximize recovery prospects. Coordinated complaint support: Where multiple victims are involved, we coordinate group filings to increase the scale of the case and elevate its priority within the investigative process. If you are unsure which materials to gather first, or whether a criminal complaint or civil claim should take priority, Decent Law Firm's digital asset team is ready to work through the facts with you from the very beginning and map out a strategy for your situation.
2026-04-01 Naver Blog -
Blogs Crypto
Crypto Money Mule Scams in Korea: "I Thought It Was Just a Part-Time Job" Won't Keep You Out of Prison
"It's an overseas Bitcoin purchasing service — just buy the coins and send them for us, and we'll pay you a commission." People who accepted offers like this and got involved are increasingly finding themselves under criminal investigation. Simply doing what they were told — buying and sending cryptocurrency — can be treated as playing a central role in a voice phishing operation, and custodial sentences are being handed down with regularity. How Crypto Money Mule Scams Work Voice phishing organizations have shifted away from cash withdrawal methods toward converting stolen funds into cryptocurrency. The scheme works as follows: victims are deceived into transferring money into an exchange account, the mule purchases Bitcoin or another cryptocurrency with those funds, and the coins are immediately sent to a designated wallet address. Once funds are converted to crypto and moved through multiple wallets, tracing and recovering them becomes extremely difficult. How People Get Recruited Most crypto money mules did not set out to participate in crime. They were approached with offers that sounded legitimate. "Just receive money in your account, buy crypto on an exchange, and send it — we'll pay you a fee" "Help us with some transfers to build up loan eligibility records" "Crypto exchange errand, high daily earnings guaranteed" Even if someone's only role was handling transfers and buying and sending coins, that conduct can be characterized as a core function within the overall fraud operation. Courts have convicted defendants on charges of aiding and abetting fraud in exactly these circumstances. The Penalties Are Severe The Act on Special Cases Concerning the Prevention of Loss Caused by Telecommunications-Based Financial Fraud (통신사기피해환급법) carries significantly heavier penalties than ordinary fraud charges. Even where losses are under 100 million KRW, a sentence of one year or more in prison is possible. Where losses exceed 500 million KRW, the sentence can range from five years to life imprisonment. Converting stolen funds into cryptocurrency and transferring them may also constitute money laundering under the Act on Regulation and Punishment of Criminal Proceeds Concealment, adding further exposure. "I Didn't Know" — How Far Does That Argument Go? The most commonly raised defense is: "I didn't know it was a voice phishing operation." Courts and investigators assess this by looking at the full picture. Whether the commission offered was unusually high Whether instructions came through Telegram, overseas numbers, or anonymous channels Whether the instructions to transfer funds and buy and send crypto were urgent and repeated Whether the person witnessed or heard anything suggesting impersonation of police or financial institutions If the circumstances were suspicious enough that a reasonable person would have questioned what was happening, and the person continued to participate anyway, the court may find constructive knowledge — making the "I didn't know" argument very difficult to sustain. If You Are Under Investigation, Act Now If you are being investigated in connection with a crypto money mule operation, getting legal counsel quickly is essential. You will need to give a detailed account of how you became involved and through whom, preserve all phone and messaging records and account information, and clearly distinguish between what you knew and what you did not know. The duration of your involvement, the number of transactions, and the total amount of funds handled will all need to be documented accurately. Decent Law Firm's digital asset team analyzes the specific circumstances and level of knowledge of each client in crypto money mule cases, maps out the scope of potential liability, and builds a practical defense strategy tailored to the facts. If you have received notice of an investigation, or if you responded to an offer and are now concerned about your exposure, please contact Decent Law Firm's digital asset team as soon as possible.
2026-03-30 Naver Blog -
Blogs Crypto
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 Naver Blog -
Blogs Crypto
Crypto Trading Bots in Korea: Legal Risks Around VASP Registration and Market Manipulation
The number of operators building and running automated cryptocurrency trading services — commonly known as trading bots — is growing rapidly. What looks like a straightforward software product from the outside can carry significant legal exposure depending on how it is structured: potential classification as a Virtual Asset Service Provider (VASP), market manipulation liability, and civil damages claims are all live risks. What matters is not what the technology does, but how the service operates. When Does a Trading Bot Become a VASP? Simply developing or selling an automated trading program does not automatically make an operator a VASP. However, once a service crosses certain structural thresholds, it may no longer be characterized as software provision — it may be treated as managing or transacting virtual assets on behalf of customers. The following structures are particularly high-risk: Collecting API keys from multiple customers and running strategies centrally on the operator's servers Pooling customer assets in the operator's wallet, executing trades, and settling afterward Running copy trading or arbitrage strategies across multiple accounts simultaneously and charging fees or performance-based compensation Once a service falls into this category, questions arise around VASP registration obligations, anti-money laundering (AML) compliance duties, and criminal exposure for operating without authorization. The same trading bot can lead to entirely different legal conclusions depending on how it is designed. Market Manipulation and Criminal Liability Automated trading programs are under close regulatory scrutiny precisely because of their potential use in market manipulation. Placing large volumes of orders in rapid succession and canceling them to artificially inflate trading volume, or distorting the order book to mislead investors, are among the most common problem patterns. Recent court decisions in Korea have resulted in custodial sentences for market manipulation carried out using automated trading programs. The position that "it was just the program" is no longer a viable defense. Operators should be particularly alert to marketing language. Phrases like "volume management" or "chart making" can be used as evidence of criminal intent in a market manipulation case. Civil Liability: Misrepresentation and Duty to Explain More frequent in practice than criminal or regulatory action are civil disputes. Expressions commonly used to market trading bot services — "principal guaranteed," "fixed monthly returns," "AI generates profits automatically" — can give rise to false advertising claims and breach of disclosure duty if losses occur. Disclaimers in terms of service do not provide complete protection. Where a service failure — a server outage, an API error, an abnormal order — causes customer losses, liability will turn on whether the operator exercised the standard of care expected. Broad indemnity clauses will not shield an operator from liability where negligence or misrepresentation can be established. How Decent Law Firm Can Help Decent Law Firm's digital asset team works at the intersection of technology and financial regulation. We help operators build legally sound businesses from the ground up. VASP analysis: Full review of service architecture to identify and eliminate unauthorized operation risk before it becomes a problem. Algorithm compliance review: Legal guidance on trading strategies to ensure they cannot be characterized as market manipulation. Terms of service and marketing compliance: Drafting and reviewing documentation to minimize false advertising exposure and build defensible terms for civil disputes. Running a service without legal review is unnecessary risk. If you are designing or operating a crypto trading bot service, contact Decent Law Firm's digital asset team for a clear-eyed assessment of where you stand.
2026-03-24 Naver Blog -
Blogs Crypto
School Violence in Korea: What Parents Need to Know About School Violence Committees, Juvenile Justice, and Legal Procedures
If you receive a call saying your child was bullied at school — or that your child has been identified as the aggressor — most parents feel completely lost about what comes next. School violence in Korea does not end with a teacher's reprimand. It can escalate into a review by the district School Violence Committee (학폭위), a criminal complaint, a juvenile court hearing, and in serious cases, placement in a juvenile detention facility. Recently, public debate has emerged around lowering the age threshold for juvenile offenders from 14 to 13, meaning even cases involving elementary and middle school students can no longer be treated lightly. How a School Violence Case Unfolds Once an incident is reported, the homeroom teacher or principal notifies the district Office of Education, which then determines whether to convene a School Violence Committee (학교폭력대책심의위원회). Minor cases may be resolved at the school level, but most are referred to the committee, which reviews the facts and determines the appropriate disciplinary measure. If the conduct constitutes a criminal offense — such as assault, injury, threats, sexual violence, or cyberbullying — the victim's family may file a separate criminal complaint with police. It is important to note that the School Violence Committee process and criminal or juvenile court proceedings can run simultaneously. Disciplinary measures range from Level 1 (written apology) to Level 9 (expulsion). These are not merely school-level sanctions — they are recorded in the student's academic file and can affect university admissions and school transfers, leaving a long-term impact on both the victim and the offender. When the Offender Is a Juvenile Under 14 If the offending student is between 10 and 14 years old, they are classified as a juvenile offender under Korean law and are not subject to criminal punishment. Instead, the case is handled under the Juvenile Act and referred to the Family Court's juvenile division, where a protective disposition is issued. Protective dispositions range from Level 1 (supervision by a guardian) to Level 10 (placement in a juvenile reformatory). The higher the level, the greater the restriction on the child's freedom and the more significant the social stigma. With ongoing discussions about lowering the juvenile offender age to 13, it is no longer safe to assume that cases involving young children fall entirely outside the scope of juvenile court proceedings. The Outcome Is Often Decided Before the Committee Meets In many school violence cases, the direction of the outcome is already set before the School Violence Committee convenes. How a party responds in the early stages — before the first written statement, before the committee is called, before a police interview — can significantly shape the entire process that follows. These cases move faster than most people expect. From the moment the school becomes aware of an incident, a committee hearing typically takes place within a matter of weeks. If criminal or juvenile court proceedings follow, the window for preparation becomes even shorter. Within that time, the affected party must establish the direction of their account, organize the evidence, and prepare for the other side's claims. The first written statement submitted becomes the reference point for everything that follows — the committee members, the police, and the juvenile court judge will all scrutinize its consistency and credibility. A statement written in haste, driven by emotion, or containing inaccuracies is very difficult to correct later. And once a School Violence Committee ruling or a juvenile protective disposition is issued, overturning it through an appeal process is rarely straightforward in practice. When Should You Consult a School Violence Lawyer? If a medical certificate has been issued, or if the case involves group bullying, persistent exclusion, sexual misconduct, or the distribution of recordings, legal counsel should be sought from the very beginning. Where criminal proceedings or a juvenile court referral are anticipated, careful preparation — separate from the committee process — is essential. Once the seriousness of a case becomes clear, there is no time to delay in reviewing your options. Decent Law Firm's school violence team handles the full process — from the School Violence Committee through criminal and juvenile court proceedings — starting from the initial consultation through to resolution.
2026-03-20 Naver Blog -
Blogs Crypto
Inheriting Crypto from Binance and Other Overseas Exchanges: What Heirs Need to Know
If a family member passed away while using overseas exchanges such as Binance, Bybit, or KuCoin, the cryptocurrency remaining in their accounts is part of their estate. Unlike a domestic bank account, however, the process is far from straightforward. Most heirs have no idea where to begin. Crypto Held on Overseas Exchanges Is Part of the Estate The fact that an exchange is based overseas does not exclude its assets from inheritance. Any asset with economic value is subject to estate laws, regardless of where it is held. The following types of crypto assets are typically included in the estate: Coins held in spot and futures accounts on overseas exchanges such as Binance, Bybit, and KuCoin Assets held in sub-accounts, Earn/staking products, Launchpad/Launchpool, and similar products Stablecoins such as USDT and USDC, as well as altcoins and tokens of all kinds Coins stored in personal wallets such as MetaMask or hardware wallets The challenge is that, unlike domestic bank accounts, there is no centralized system for looking up balances across exchanges. Heirs must track down every exchange and wallet the deceased used on their own. This typically requires piecing together evidence from emails, text messages, OTP apps, exchange notification emails, and bank transaction records. Why Inheriting from Overseas Exchanges Is So Complicated Overseas exchange accounts are built around a single-user model. From account registration and KYC verification to two-factor authentication, everything is tied to the account holder personally. Even as a legitimate heir, you cannot simply log in or withdraw funds. ⚠️ Important: Attempting to access the account without authorization carries serious legal risk. Guessing login credentials or bypassing 2FA to move assets could expose you to criminal or civil liability. If there are multiple heirs, it could escalate into a dispute over embezzlement, breach of fiduciary duty, or unjust enrichment. Each exchange also has its own inheritance process and documentation requirements. Some, like Binance, have a formal inheritance procedure in place. Others have no published guidelines at all and handle requests case by case via email. If the account was registered under a non-Korean nationality — such as a European or Japanese address — the exchange may require documents that conform to that country's legal standards. When multiple heirs are involved, some exchanges require signatures and consent from all parties, which can stall the process for months if family cooperation breaks down. Three Problems That Are Hard to Solve Alone These are the most common difficulties heirs encounter in practice. ① The documentation cycle Even after contacting customer support, heirs often receive nothing more than a generic reply asking for proof of death and proof of heirship. Submit one set of documents, and the exchange asks for another. Misunderstandings in English-language correspondence can send the process back to square one. ② The estate tax deadline If the tax filing deadline arrives before the crypto has actually been recovered, heirs face a separate problem: which date's price should be used for valuation, and how should the filing be handled? Missing the deadline or filing incorrectly can result in significant penalties and surcharges. ③ Disputes among co-heirs One heir may want to recover and divide the assets quickly, while another delays or refuses to cooperate on documentation. If one heir accesses the account and moves assets unilaterally before an agreement is reached, it can give rise to claims of embezzlement or unjust enrichment against them. Decent Law Firm's Five-Step Process Decent Law Firm's dedicated digital asset team handles inheritance cases involving not only domestic exchanges such as Upbit and Bithumb, but also overseas exchanges including Binance. ① Identifying the deceased's crypto holdings We begin by reviewing emails, mobile records, 2FA apps, and transaction histories to build a complete picture of every exchange account and wallet involved. ② Structuring the estate and tax strategy We assess the composition of heirs, the existence of a will, the proportion of crypto relative to other assets, and the optimal approach to estate tax filing — helping the family reach a clear agreement on how assets will be divided. ③ Analyzing each exchange's requirements and preparing documentation We review the inheritance procedures and requirements for each overseas exchange, then design the appropriate authentication process — including translation, notarization, and Apostille certification where required. ④ Filing inheritance claims and supporting asset recovery We handle all English-language correspondence with the exchanges, manage document submission, and respond to follow-up requests — working to ensure the inherited crypto is transferred safely into the heirs' accounts. ⑤ Estate tax filing and ongoing risk management We oversee valuation timing, exchange rate application, and tax return preparation, while accounting for the risk of future tax audits or disputes. Not sure where to start? Let's talk first The decisions made early in an overseas crypto inheritance case can significantly affect the odds of recovery, the time it takes, the tax burden, and the likelihood of family conflict. Decent Law Firm's digital asset team is with you from the initial consultation through to final recovery and tax resolution.
2026-03-19 Naver Blog
