-
BlogsPenalties for Unpaid Wages: If You Are an Employer, This May Be Your Critical Opportunity to Respond Properly
Unpaid Wages Are No Longer Just a “Civil Matter” Failure to pay wages is no longer treated as a simple contractual or civil issue. It may result in criminal liability under the Labor Standards Act. In particular, recent legislative amendments have significantly strengthened the maximum penalties applicable to employers involved in unpaid wage cases, increasing the maximum sentence from up to three years’ imprisonment to up to five years’ imprisonment. Under the revised law, the maximum penalty for employers responsible for unpaid wages has been increased from: Up to 3 years’ imprisonment or a fine of up to KRW 30 million to: Up to 5 years’ imprisonment or a fine of up to KRW 50 million This means unpaid wage cases are no longer matters that simply end with administrative fines. Employers must now realistically consider the possibility of actual imprisonment. The Initial Response During the Investigation Stage Determines the Outcome The moment a criminal complaint regarding unpaid wages is filed, criminal proceedings effectively begin. At this stage, the following factors become critically important: ① Whether there was intentional misconduct ② The employer’s actual financial ability to make payment ③ Efforts made toward repayment or settlement Investigative authorities do not focus solely on whether wages were unpaid. They place significant weight on how the employer responded to the situation. Depending on the employer’s initial statements and conduct, the case may be viewed either as: “Malicious and intentional nonpayment of wages,” or “An unavoidable financial or managerial difficulty” This distinction often has a direct and substantial impact on the severity of punishment. Why Legal Representation Matters One of the biggest mistakes employers make in wage-related cases is assuming: “I’ll just attend the investigation first and deal with it later.” However, once a statement is submitted during an investigation, it cannot easily be reversed. Legal counsel plays an essential role in areas such as: Legally restructuring and explaining the circumstances surrounding the unpaid wages Organizing evidence demonstrating payment intent and repayment efforts Designing settlement strategies and determining the appropriate timing Establishing an effective response strategy toward investigative authorities In unpaid wage criminal cases, whether and when a settlement is reached often becomes one of the most decisive factors affecting the final outcome. There are many cases where employers either attempt settlements recklessly or, conversely, neglect the matter entirely, ultimately worsening the situation. Improper handling of the case may lead not merely to fines, but to actual imprisonment. This is therefore not an issue that should ever be taken lightly. Decent Law Firm’s Response Strategy Decent Law Firm approaches unpaid wage cases not merely from the perspective of defense, but with a primary focus on minimizing criminal liability and overall legal risk. Our main response strategies include: Analyzing the structural causes of unpaid wages and narrowing the scope of liability Establishing strategies to demonstrate lack of intentional misconduct Designing phased settlement processes Simultaneously managing criminal proceedings and related civil risks In particular, wage-related disputes arising during business operations require a structural and strategic approach rather than the type of response typically used in ordinary individual disputes. By combining expertise in both labor law and criminal law, Decent Law Firm provides strategies focused on achieving practical and meaningful results. Now that criminal penalties have already been significantly strengthened, the decisions made at this stage may ultimately determine whether criminal punishment is imposed. If you are currently facing concerns regarding this issue, establishing the right direction now may substantially change the outcome of the case. This is not the time to allow the problem to escalate. It is the time to strategically control and minimize legal risk.
2026-03-17 Naver Blog -
Blogs
The Revised Yellow Envelope Act Is Now in Effect: The First Thing You Need to Check
Key Changes to Articles 2 and 3 of the Labor Union Act (Yellow Envelope Act) “Does this mean our company could now be held responsible for issues involving subcontractor employees?” This is a question increasingly being raised in real business environments. The revised Yellow Envelope Act, which took effect on March 10, 2026, is not merely a technical amendment to statutory language. It represents a major institutional shift that strengthens the authority of labor unions and fundamentally redefines the scope of employers’ responsibilities. The key changes introduced by the amendment include: Substantial expansion of the definition of “employer” Expansion of the scope of recognized labor disputes New grounds for reducing or limiting damages claims against labor unions Ultimately, the core implication is clear: labor unions now possess broader bargaining power, while companies face increased legal responsibility. As a result, companies must comprehensively review their contractual structures and internal decision-making processes, while labor unions must prepare lawful response strategies aligned with their newly expanded authority. The extent of advance preparation will ultimately determine the scale of future legal risk. The following response measures therefore deserve close attention. Key Response Points for Companies and Labor Unions Through this amendment, the scope for recognizing a principal contractor as an employer has broadened significantly, while limitations on damages claims have substantially changed the landscape of labor-management relations. From the corporate perspective, companies must carefully assess the extent to which they exercise control over working conditions within indirect employment structures such as subcontracting and outsourcing arrangements. If a principal contractor substantially influences employees’ working conditions, bargaining obligations may arise. Accordingly, companies may need to revise contractual provisions and approval procedures. In workplaces where multiple labor unions exist, it is also essential to establish strategies for responding to successive bargaining requests. To address these issues, companies should establish: Standards for unified bargaining channels Internal information disclosure procedures Response systems for damages claims arising from lawful labor disputes From the labor union perspective, direct bargaining channels with principal contractors are becoming more accessible, and the burden of damages liability during lawful labor disputes has been reduced. As a result, the legality of bargaining procedures and the efficiency of organizational strategies have become increasingly important. In essence, the amendment establishes a new standard for both labor and management: “clear responsibility and transparent procedures.” Whether adequate preparation is undertaken now will become the most important factor in determining future dispute risks. Why Work With Decent Law Firm? The revised Yellow Envelope Act is not simply about changes to statutory provisions. It is a major issue requiring companies to redesign their entire decision-making structures and labor-management communication systems. In situations like this, businesses need professionals who understand not only legal theory, but also operational realities and practical risk factors in the workplace. Decent Law Firm operates a dedicated team specializing in corporate advisory services and labor risk management, providing practical solutions in the following areas: Employer status analysis and legal risk assessment Design of bargaining and labor dispute response structures Damages liability risk control strategies Advisory services regarding collective bargaining agreements and internal policy revisions Decent Law Firm goes beyond providing abstract legal interpretations. We act as a practical partner helping businesses maintain stable labor-management relations even after the revised law takes effect. If your organization needs practical and immediately applicable response measures, now is the time to begin preparing with Decent Law Firm. Ultimately, This Is an Unavoidable Process of Change At this stage, the key response strategy is to accurately understand the purpose of the revised system, reduce unnecessary disputes, and ensure that necessary bargaining procedures become more transparent. At Decent Law Firm, consultations are conducted directly by attorneys who are also certified labor consultants, as well as legal professionals with extensive corporate operational experience. We help both companies and labor unions respond in predictable and legally sound ways while preserving the intent of the law. With sufficient case analysis and properly documented procedures, risks can be managed in advance. Before it becomes too late, it is important to seek professional legal guidance and prepare strategically.
2026-03-12 Naver Blog -
Blogs
Do Crypto & Stock Influencers (KOLs) Have to Disclose Their Holdings? What the New Korean Law Means for You
Crypto and stock influencers in Korea are increasingly hearing the term "mandatory asset disclosure" — and for good reason. The Democratic Party of Korea is preparing legislation that would require financial influencers (KOLs) who recommend stocks or crypto assets to publicly disclose the type and quantity of assets they hold, as well as any compensation they receive. What Does the Proposed Amendment Actually Require? The proposed amendment to the Virtual Asset User Protection Act centers on three key obligations. Anyone who repeatedly recommends crypto, stocks, or other financial investment products to a broad audience — or who receives compensation to encourage trading — must disclose the type and quantity of assets they hold, along with any remuneration received. Remuneration includes not just cash, but tokens, commissions, advertising fees, and other forms of payment. The penalties are what make this significant. This is not a minor administrative fine. Violations could be treated on par with market manipulation and front-running under the Capital Markets Act — in other words, a serious market order violation. Why Does This Matter Now, Before the Law Has Even Passed? Even before the legislation is enacted, the market has already shifted. Influencers who do not disclose their holdings are increasingly viewed with suspicion. In the digital asset space in particular, a common practice has come under scrutiny: receiving token allocations at below-market prices with short lock-up periods, then publishing investment recommendation content to followers. This structure is one of the primary targets of the proposed legislation. Once the law passes, past content could also become an issue. That is why now is the time to review how your channel operates. What KOLs and Trading Room Operators Need to Check Right Now The core question is: what do I need to disclose, and how much? 1. Disclosure of Holdings in Recommended Assets If you recommend a coin or stock, you need a clear standard for disclosing whether you hold it, the size of your position, and when you acquired it. Simply mentioning that you also hold the asset is not enough — the specific wording and timing of your disclosure matters. 2. Compensation Received from Projects or Exchanges If you receive cash, tokens, commissions, or advertising fees from any project or exchange, you need to document what form the payment takes, when it is received, and where and how it is disclosed in your content. Receiving compensation is not itself a problem. Concealing it is. 3. Paid Trading Rooms and Membership Services Even if you describe your service as "sharing information," you need to assess whether it could be characterized as investment advisory activity in substance. This includes checking whether you meet the registration requirements for a quasi-investment advisory business, and whether your terms of service and operating structure are aligned with the direction of the new regulations. If Any of the Following Apply to You, Consult a Lawyer Before Continuing You have received tokens or commissions from a project and recommended that asset to your audience. You operate a paid trading room or membership service where you share trade timing information. You have used language such as "principal guaranteed" or "guaranteed returns" in your content. You have received token allocations with short lock-up periods or favorable pricing, and subsequently published investment recommendation content. If any of these apply, the way you currently operate your channel may be a direct target of the proposed legislation. If You Run a Channel, Set Your Standards Now The question we hear most often from KOLs and influencers is this: "How much do I actually need to disclose? If I share too much, I expose my strategy. If I share too little, it looks like I'm hiding something." The answer is not to disclose everything. It is to establish a clear, consistent disclosure standard that fits your business model — before a problem arises. In actual virtual asset and capital markets cases, individuals who had defined their disclosure and documentation standards in advance and applied them consistently had significantly more room to defend themselves when investigations or complaints arose. Decent Law Firm's Virtual Asset Practice Group can help you identify where your current channel and content structure may carry legal exposure, establish an asset disclosure standard aligned with amendments to the Capital Markets Act and the Virtual Asset User Protection Act, draft disclosure language and disclaimers for conflict-of-interest situations, and review your terms of service and operating structure if you run a paid service. If you are already running a channel, or planning to launch KOL activity in earnest, get your standards in place now — before a complaint, investigation, or lawsuit forces the conversation. Contact Decent Law Firm's Virtual Asset Practice Group today.
2026-03-11 Naver Blog -
Blogs
Illegal Employment of Foreign Nationals: The One Thing You Must Do to Avoid Serious Penalties
Crackdowns on Illegal Employment of Foreign Nationals Are Not Mere Administrative Issues Many people mistakenly believe that crackdowns on the illegal employment of foreign nationals are simply administrative procedures. In reality, these cases involve violations of the Immigration Control Act and may result in significant legal liability not only for the foreign national involved, but also for the employer. Foreign nationals may become subject to enforcement actions if they engage in employment activities without a visa status permitting employment, or if they engage in activities beyond the scope of their authorized visa status. In such cases, a deportation order may be issued under Article 46(1)(8) of the Immigration Control Act, and reentry into Korea may be restricted for a certain period following deportation pursuant to Article 11(1)(6) of the same Act. In addition, if an employer hires a foreign national who does not possess a visa status permitting employment activities, the employer may face criminal penalties of up to three years’ imprisonment or a fine of up to KRW 30 million, regardless of intent. Importantly, statements made during the enforcement or investigation process may later affect both administrative sanctions and criminal proceedings. Accordingly, any written statements or responses carelessly submitted during an investigation may later be used as unfavorable evidence. Essential Response Strategies After an Enforcement Action If a crackdown on the illegal employment of foreign nationals has already taken place, several critical response measures are necessary. Review of Visa Status and Actual Working Arrangements The legal assessment may differ significantly depending on whether the foreign national merely “helped with work,” was in an actual employment relationship, or was working pursuant to a lawful dispatch or subcontracting arrangement. Securing Relevant Documents and Evidence Key materials include: Employment contracts Salary payment records Working hour records These materials play an important role in determining issues such as intent and the existence of an actual employment relationship. Responding Carefully to Statements and Confirmation Documents Many individuals assume that written explanations or confirmation statements are merely procedural formalities. However, such documents are often later used as evidence supporting legal liability. In cases involving crackdowns on illegal employment of foreign nationals, accurately organizing the factual background and supporting materials is critically important. If this process is not handled properly, unnecessary legal liability may expand significantly. Why Legal Representation Matters in Illegal Employment Cases Involving Foreign Nationals Although these cases may appear to be simple labor issues, they are in fact complex matters involving immigration law, criminal law, and administrative procedures simultaneously. Legal professionals play a particularly important role in the following areas: Legal analysis regarding potential visa status violations Determining whether an actual employment relationship existed Establishing defense strategies regarding the employer’s intent Responding to administrative sanctions such as departure orders or deportation, as well as criminal penalties including imprisonment or fines Many clients seek legal advice only after enforcement actions have already taken place. However, establishing a strategy during the initial response stage is far more important. Sudden enforcement actions related to the illegal employment of foreign nationals often create significant anxiety and uncertainty. In these situations, accurate legal analysis and a strategic response can make a substantial difference. Decent Law Firm’s Response Strategy Decent Law Firm has continuously handled various labor and criminal matters, including disputes involving the employment of foreign nationals. In particular, for cases involving crackdowns on the illegal employment of foreign nationals, we provide legal assistance in the following ways. First, we analyze the background of the enforcement action and the employment structure to determine the actual scope of potential legal liability. Second, we systematically organize case materials to prevent unnecessary criminal liability or excessive administrative sanctions. Third, we establish response strategies aimed at minimizing legal risks for both employers and foreign workers. Crackdowns on the illegal employment of foreign nationals are not matters that end with simple fines. They may significantly affect business operations and immigration status as well. If you are facing difficulties due to an unexpected enforcement action, it is essential to carefully review the circumstances of the case and respond strategically. With professional legal assistance, it is possible to find a more stable and effective path toward resolution.
2026-03-10 Naver Blog -
Blogs
AI Auto-Trading Investment Scams in Korea: How to Spot Them Before It's Too Late
Why AI Auto-Trading Scams Are on the Rise As tensions in the Middle East continue to unsettle global markets, fraudsters in Korea are seizing on the uncertainty — packaging it as a once-in-a-lifetime investment opportunity. At the center of it all is a surge in fake AI auto-trading scams. The pitch sounds convincing: a sophisticated AI system that analyzes the market in real time and generates consistent returns on your behalf. In reality, many of these operations are run by unlicensed companies with one goal — collecting as much money as possible before disappearing. Scammers typically start by flooding YouTube, social media, Telegram, and KakaoTalk group chats with investment seminars, free webinars, and screenshots of impressive-looking returns. They bundle so-called "expert trading signals" with automated trading software, and use headlines about the Middle East or global market volatility to push the narrative: "The people making money right now know something you don't." How the Scam Actually Works First contact usually comes through a YouTube video, a KakaoTalk open chat room, Telegram, or a free online seminar. The messaging is polished and persuasive — "AI auto-trading that responds to Middle East developments in real time," or "futures auto-trading built by a professional quant team." Screenshots of profits and glowing testimonials are shared repeatedly to build trust. Once you seem interested, they present a contract. It typically includes language like "the company will cover any losses in full" or "you can request repayment of your principal and returns at any time." They emphasize that because there's a signed agreement, everything is legally protected. What they don't tell you is that these contracts are almost never legally enforceable. Then comes the money transfer — and this is where things get telling. Instead of depositing into your own brokerage or futures account, you're asked to send funds to a corporate or personal account controlled by the company. After that, you're given access to a private app or website that shows your balance growing day by day. It looks real. It isn't. No actual trades are taking place. Up to this point, most victims have no reason to be suspicious. That's exactly the point. When you try to withdraw your money, the problems begin. Suddenly there are fees to pay — taxes, security deposits, processing charges. Each time you comply and send more money, new obstacles appear. Then, at some point, the messages stop. The website goes offline. The app stops working. The money is gone. Hydrogen and Drone Investment Scams Follow the Same Playbook The same structure shows up in a different costume. "Invest in a hydrogen energy company and receive fixed monthly dividends." "Back a drone logistics startup and earn steady rental income." The framing changes, but the mechanics don't. High-risk, early-stage ventures are presented as if they were as safe as a savings account or government bond. Most of these companies have no license or registration with Korean financial regulators. The "dividends" being paid out don't come from actual business revenue — they come from money sent in by newer investors. That's the definition of a Ponzi scheme, and it operates on the same foundation as the guaranteed-return unlicensed fundraising scams described above. Warning Signs to Watch For You're asked to send money to a company account rather than your own brokerage or futures account. The pitch leads with guaranteed principal and fixed monthly returns, while any mention of risk or potential losses is absent or vague. You're shown screenshots of profits and video testimonials, but there's no clear explanation of how the strategy actually works. A cutting-edge technology is name-dropped — AI, hydrogen, drones — but you can't independently verify the business operations or financials. If any of these apply, stop and consult a professional before going any further. If You've Already Sent Money, Your First Move Is Evidence The moment you suspect something is wrong, start preserving everything. Save your contracts and promotional materials, transaction records, screenshots of the app or website, and all Telegram or text message conversations. Do it immediately — these platforms shut down fast, and once they do, the evidence disappears with them. Cases like these typically involve multiple overlapping legal violations: criminal fraud, the Act on the Aggravated Punishment of Specific Economic Crimes, the Act on the Regulation of Similar Receiving of Funds, and unregistered investment advisory or discretionary investment management under the Financial Investment Services and Capital Markets Act. Untangling all of this on your own is extremely difficult. Decent Law Firm's criminal litigation team has handled cases involving fake AI auto-trading schemes, unlicensed fundraising operations, and investment fraud of all kinds. We work through the evidence with you and map out your options — both criminal and civil. If you suspect you've been targeted, reach out to us now.
2026-03-09 Naver Blog -
Blogs
Winning an Unfair Dismissal Case: What You Need to Know About Remedies and Strategic Response
Criteria and Legal Framework for Unfair Dismissal Under Article 23 of the Labor Standards Act, an employer may not dismiss an employee without just cause. Accordingly, whether a dismissal is lawful is generally assessed based on three key factors. 1) Justifiability of the Grounds for Dismissal A minor mistake or a relatively light disciplinary issue is generally not sufficient to justify termination of employment. 2) Legality of the Procedure If the employer failed to follow the disciplinary procedures set out in the rules of employment or collective agreement, or failed to provide the employee with a sufficient opportunity to explain or defend themselves, the dismissal may be deemed procedurally defective. 3) Proportionality of the Dismissal If other employees received only warnings for the same or similar conduct, while only one specific employee was dismissed, the dismissal may be considered excessive. In such cases, the nature and seriousness of the misconduct, the purpose of disciplinary action, and the standards for determining disciplinary measures are assessed comprehensively. If the disciplinary measure is found to be objectively and clearly unreasonable, it may be deemed a violation of the principle of equality. These factors are assessed as a whole. If the dismissal fails to meet these standards, there is a high possibility that the Labor Relations Commission may issue a remedy order, or that a court may render a judgment invalidating the dismissal. Key Evidence Required to Win an Unfair Dismissal Case In an unfair dismissal case, the most important element is evidence. If you begin searching for documents only after receiving notice of dismissal, it may already be difficult to secure key materials. The following materials may play a critical role: Written notice of dismissal or disciplinary notice Performance evaluation records and work performance documents Company rules of employment and personnel regulations Emails and messenger conversation records Statements from colleagues or internal company notices These materials serve as essential evidence to prove that the grounds for dismissal were unjustified. In actual cases, whether sufficient evidence has been secured often significantly affects whether the dismissal is recognized as unfair and whether remedies are granted. In particular, if the company claims redundancy dismissal based on “managerial necessity,” objective materials must be secured to refute whether the employer satisfied the separate requirements under Article 24 of the Labor Standards Act, including urgent managerial necessity, efforts to avoid dismissal, reasonable and fair selection of employees subject to dismissal, and sincere consultation with employee representatives. If the dismissal is based on disciplinary grounds such as “work attitude issues,” evidence is needed to prove that such grounds are unjustified. Why Legal Representation Matters in Unfair Dismissal Cases An unfair dismissal case cannot be resolved simply by arguing that the dismissal was unfair. In Labor Relations Commission proceedings, an application for remedy must be filed within three months from the date of unfair dismissal. The process requires systematic preparation, including drafting the application, responding to the employer’s submissions, submitting evidence, and preparing for the hearing. In addition, employers usually respond with assistance from certified labor consultants or legal professionals. If an employee proceeds alone, they may be placed at a disadvantage in procedural and strategic aspects. Professional assistance is especially important in the following areas: Organizing the legal issues of the case Developing a strategy for collecting and organizing evidence Preparing for Labor Relations Commission hearings Establishing a strategy for reinstatement and claims for wages equivalent to lost earnings An unfair dismissal case is not just a simple dispute. It can significantly affect one’s future employment and career. Therefore, to increase the possibility of obtaining relief for unfair dismissal, a strategic approach from the initial stage is crucial. If the issue is taken lightly and the timing for response is missed, it may lead to consequences that are difficult to reverse. A careful approach is essential. Decent Law Firm’s Strategy for Unfair Dismissal Cases Because unfair dismissal is directly connected to an individual’s livelihood, it requires a careful approach that goes beyond basic legal response. Based on our experience in labor cases, Decent Law Firm supports clients in the following ways. First, we closely review the lawfulness of the grounds and procedures for dismissal at the initial stage and objectively assess the likelihood of success in an unfair dismissal case. Second, we systematically design an evidence preservation strategy and present persuasive materials during Labor Relations Commission hearings. Third, we establish a tailored response strategy based on the client’s objectives, including reinstatement, claims for wages equivalent to lost earnings, and potential settlement. Our goal is to provide practical support to those facing unfair dismissal. Rather than attempting to resolve the matter alone, working with professionals to develop a strategy can become a decisive turning point in the direction of the case. If you have received an unfair notice of dismissal, the initial response can determine the outcome. Accurate analysis and strategic response are essential to increasing the likelihood of success in an unfair dismissal case.
2026-03-06 Naver Blog
