-
BlogsLivelihood-Based Objection for DUI License Suspension or Revocation in Korea: When Reduction May Be Excluded
If your driver’s license has been suspended or revoked due to DUI in Korea, you may file an objection with the competent metropolitan or provincial police agency within 60 days from the date you receive the disposition. One of the grounds for reduction is when driving is an essential means of supporting the applicant’s family. In practice, this is often referred to as a “livelihood-based objection.” However, even if driving is important for your work or livelihood, certain circumstances may exclude you from reduction from the outset. This article explains the legal basis of the livelihood-based objection and the key situations where a reduction may not be available. Legal Basis and Possible Effect of an Objection An objection against a driver’s license suspension or revocation due to DUI is based on Article 94 of the Korean Road Traffic Act and Articles 95 and 96 of the Enforcement Rule of the Road Traffic Act. The objection must be filed within 60 days from the date the disposition is received. Once filed, the case is reviewed by the Administrative Review Committee for Driver’s License Dispositions, which may decide whether the disposition can be reduced. The Enforcement Rule sets out several grounds for reduction. One of the most commonly used grounds is where driving is an essential means of maintaining the livelihood of the applicant’s family. If this ground is accepted, a license revocation may be reduced to a 110-day license suspension. A license suspension may also be reduced by up to one-half of the original suspension period. When Reduction May Be Excluded Before reviewing whether driving is necessary for livelihood, the authorities first check whether any exclusion grounds apply. Reduction may be excluded in the following cases: ▪️Blood alcohol concentration over 0.1% If the driver’s BAC exceeded 0.1% at the time of detection. ▪️Traffic accident involving personal injury If the DUI resulted in an accident where another person was injured. ▪️Refusal to take a breathalyzer test, fleeing the scene, or assaulting a police officer If the driver refused testing, fled, or used violence against an officer during enforcement. ▪️Repeated personal injury accidents within the past five years If the driver caused three or more traffic accidents involving personal injury within the past five years. ▪️Prior DUI record within the past five years If the driver has a previous DUI record within the past five years. Source: Appendix 28 of the Enforcement Rule of the Road Traffic Act These grounds apply independently. This means that even one applicable ground may exclude the applicant from reduction, regardless of how important driving is for work or family livelihood. Even a first-time DUI offender may be excluded if the BAC level exceeds the applicable threshold or if a personal injury accident occurred. What to Check Before Filing an Objection Before preparing a livelihood-based objection, it is important to review the following points in order. First, check the BAC level at the time of detection. If it exceeded 0.1%, reduction may be excluded. Second, check whether there was any accident, refusal to take a breathalyzer test, fleeing, or other aggravating circumstance. Third, if no exclusion ground applies, prepare documents showing that driving is necessary for maintaining livelihood. These may include an employment certificate, business registration certificate, client or delivery records, income documents, and other materials showing that driving is essential for work. If an objection is filed only with a statement of hardship, without first checking the exclusion grounds, the 60-day filing period may be used up without meaningful review. How Decent Law Firm Can Assist In livelihood-based DUI objections, the possibility of reduction does not depend only on whether the applicant is a first-time offender. BAC level, accident history, refusal to comply with testing, and prior DUI records are critical factors that determine whether reduction may be available at all. Decent Law Firm’s criminal defense team reviews DUI-related administrative dispositions, including objections and administrative appeals, from the initial stage. If you have received notice of license suspension or revocation in Korea, it is important to review your eligibility before the 60-day deadline expires.
2026-07-01 Naver Blog -
Blogs
Comprehensive Guide: Why You Need a Lawyer Present During Police Questioning, Including Costs
Should I Go to Police Questioning Alone? Receiving a summons from the police can leave your mind racing. "Did I do something wrong?" "Is it okay to go alone?" "Wouldn't bringing a lawyer make me look worse?" — these thoughts all hit at once. In fact, many people who come in for consultations do so only after having already gone through questioning alone once. Many say, "At the time it seemed like no big deal, so I just went, but looking back now, I think I handled it too lightly." To cut to the conclusion: having a lawyer accompany you to police questioning isn't optional — it's the core of your initial response. Today, we'll explain why that is, and go over the associated costs. Why Going Alone Is Risky The first thing to understand is that everything you say during questioning is recorded, word for word, in the official record. Once you sign and seal the record, its contents become important evidence used throughout the investigation and trial process, so careful statements from the very start are essential. The order of your words, even your choice of phrasing, can be quoted directly in later proceedings. Additionally, offhand remarks can be interpreted very differently from what you intended — sometimes as an admission of guilt. Something as simple as "I guess that could have happened" can end up recorded in the transcript as an admission. On top of this, whether you're being questioned as a suspect or as a witness completely changes how you should respond. A suspect has the right to remain silent and may refuse to answer questions that could be self-incriminating, whereas a witness is generally expected to cooperate with the investigation but cannot be compelled to appear or testify. The first step upon receiving a summons is to clearly understand your own legal status. Why You Should Have Decent Law Firm Accompany You When a lawyer is present, they can review likely questions beforehand and help you organize the direction of your statements. Before and after questioning, the lawyer advises the client on how to phrase statements, and during questioning, they may — with the investigator's approval — voice input when necessary. This is where Decent Law Firm sets itself apart. Dedicated Team Structure We have dedicated attorneys by practice area — criminal, virtual assets, civil, and labor law. The kinds of questions and risk points that come up in a simple assault case are completely different from those in a cryptocurrency fraud case. Decent's structure means the right specialist is assigned to your case from the very beginning. And it doesn't stop at accompaniment — your dedicated team continues handling your case seamlessly through referral to prosecutors, arrest warrant proceedings, and indictment decisions. Experience Because our specialists in each field have handled a wide range of case types in depth, we quickly recognize patterns — what questions are likely to come up, and which answers could be risky. Response Speed Notices for questioning are usually scheduled on short notice. Contact us and we can quickly coordinate a schedule to accompany you. Even if you feel you don't have enough time to prepare, reaching out first is the priority. Cost of Police Questioning Accompaniment Costs vary depending on whether you're a witness or a suspect, the number of questioning sessions, and the complexity of the case. We provide an accurate cost estimate only after reviewing the details of your case during a consultation. "I'm worried about the cost, so I think I'll just handle it alone..." However, missteps in your initial response often lead to fines or criminal penalties down the line, resulting in a much larger cost that you'll have to bear on your own regardless. In that sense, the cost of accompaniment is best viewed as an upfront investment. If Any of the Following Apply to You, Get a Consultation Now If even one of these applies to you, we strongly recommend getting a consultation right away: Your summons specifies concrete charges You've been asked to submit a written statement You've already been questioned alone once and are now feeling anxious Your questioning date is already scheduled If your questioning date has been set, don't delay — consult with Decent Law Firm first.
2026-06-30 Naver Blog -
Blogs
Illegal Crypto OTC Trading in Korea: Investigation Risks for Users
In June 2026, the Financial Services Commission (FSC) and the Korea Financial Intelligence Unit (KoFIU) announced that 12 suspected illegal virtual asset operators had been referred to the police following a joint investigation by DAXA and registered virtual asset service providers. According to the announcement, the investigation identified 8 illegal over-the-counter (OTC) crypto dealers and 4 overseas exchanges suspected of conducting business targeting Korean users without proper registration. These operators allegedly attracted users through Telegram, websites, open chat rooms, Korean-language services, KRW payment support, and domestic marketing activities. The Korean financial authorities have also warned that users of unregistered virtual asset service providers may face unexpected disadvantages, including being subject to investigation during the process of verifying counterparties and the source of funds. This article explains the key legal risks that may apply to users of illegal crypto OTC channels in Korea and how investigative authorities may assess the user’s knowledge and intent. Key Laws That May Apply Under Korea’s Act on Reporting and Using Specified Financial Transaction Information, commonly referred to as the Specified Financial Information Act, virtual asset service providers must report to KoFIU before conducting business in Korea. An operator that conducts virtual asset business without proper reporting may be subject to criminal penalties under Article 17 of the Act, including imprisonment of up to 5 years or a fine of up to KRW 50 million. In principle, the direct target of punishment under this provision is the unregistered business operator. However, depending on the circumstances of the transaction, users may also be investigated under other laws. Category Key Issue Potential Penalty Article 3(1) of the Act on Regulation and Punishment of Criminal Proceeds Concealment Disguising the acquisition or disposition of criminal proceeds, disguising the origin of criminal proceeds, or concealing criminal proceeds Imprisonment of up to 5 years or a fine of up to KRW 30 million Article 4 of the Act on Regulation and Punishment of Criminal Proceeds Concealment Receiving criminal proceeds while aware of the relevant circumstances Imprisonment of up to 3 years or a fine of up to KRW 20 million Article 17 of the Specified Financial Information Act Operating an unregistered virtual asset business Imprisonment of up to 5 years or a fine of up to KRW 50 million For ordinary users, direct liability for violating AML obligations under the Specified Financial Information Act is generally limited. In actual investigations, however, authorities tend to focus more closely on the source of funds, the identity of the counterparty, the transaction pattern, and the reason for using an OTC channel instead of a registered exchange. Key Legal Issue: The User’s Knowledge Illegal crypto OTC channels are often considered high-risk because they can make fund flows difficult to trace. For this reason, they may be misused for converting or concealing funds related to crimes such as narcotics, illegal gambling, phishing, or other fraud. In these cases, the key issue is whether the user knew, or could reasonably be seen as having known, that the funds were criminal proceeds or that the transaction structure was abnormal. The Supreme Court of Korea has held that, for a violation of the Criminal Proceeds Concealment Act, it is sufficient for the person to recognize that the property in question constitutes criminal proceeds. The person does not necessarily need to know the exact type or details of the underlying crime. Supreme Court Decision 2006Do5288, January 11, 2007 In other words, even if the user did not know the specific crime involved, intent may still be recognized if the user was aware that the funds were illegal in nature. Therefore, simply saying that the user did not know the operator was unregistered may not be enough. The user must be able to explain, based on the transaction history and structure, why there was no reasonable basis to suspect illegality. Circumstances Investigators May Review When it is difficult to directly confirm a user’s intent, investigative authorities may infer the user’s knowledge from the surrounding circumstances. Common factors include: · Use of unofficial trading channels Trading through Telegram channels, open chat rooms, or private OTC groups instead of registered exchanges. · Repeated or continuous transactions Using the same method over a long period of time or conducting multiple transactions. · Unclear source of funds Difficulty identifying where the funds came from or who the true counterparty was. · Abnormal conditions compared to registered exchanges Using a structure that allows KRW payments, fast conversion, or trading without proper identity verification. Authorities usually do not rely on a single factor alone. Instead, they assess the overall transaction period, frequency, amount, channel characteristics, and fund flow to determine whether the user may have recognized the illegality of the transaction. Decent Law Firm Virtual Asset Practice Group Investigations involving users of illegal crypto OTC channels often involve multiple legal issues at the same time, including violations of the Specified Financial Information Act, the nature of the transaction funds, and whether the user had knowledge of criminal proceeds. Decent Law Firm’s Virtual Asset Practice Group has advised and represented clients in matters involving unregistered virtual asset service providers, OTC crypto transactions, and criminal proceeds concealment allegations from the early stages of investigation. If you have been contacted by the police or prosecutors in Korea, or if you are unsure about the nature of the allegations, it is important to review your transaction history and response strategy before attending any investigative interview. Source: Financial Services Commission, Press Release on Caution Against Using and Trading with Illegal Virtual Asset Operators, June 24, 2026 This content is provided for general informational purposes only and does not constitute legal advice for any specific case.
2026-06-26 Naver Blog -
Blogs
Crypto Referral Liability in Korea: Why the FSC Issued a Warning on Unregistered Virtual Asset Service Providers
Sharing overseas crypto exchange referral links on YouTube, Telegram, or open chat rooms may seem like simple advertising. However, in its press release dated June 24, 2026, the Financial Services Commission (FSC) stated that referral or recommendation-link activities may be viewed as assisting unregistered virtual asset business operations. The FSC also noted that referrers themselves may be subject to criminal liability depending on the circumstances. If you operate or participate in crypto referral marketing, private stablecoin exchange, or promotion of overseas crypto exchanges targeting Korean users, it is important to review whether your activities may raise issues under Korea’s Specified Financial Information Act. Key Points from the FSC Warning The FSC explained that, under the Specified Financial Information Act, any entity conducting virtual asset business targeting Korean users must be reported to the Korea Financial Intelligence Unit (KoFIU), unless it is one of the 28 registered virtual asset service providers. If an entity conducts virtual asset trading, exchange, transfer, custody, brokerage, or intermediary services as a business without proper reporting, this may constitute a violation of the Specified Financial Information Act. Unregistered virtual asset business activities may be punishable by imprisonment of up to 5 years or a fine of up to KRW 50 million. The FSC also noted that, after the amended Specified Financial Information Act takes effect in August 2026, those involved in unregistered illegal business activities may face additional restrictions. These may include restrictions on becoming a major shareholder of a domestic virtual asset service provider or serving as a representative or executive officer for a certain period. In this sense, the FSC press release is not merely a general user warning. It can also be understood as a signal that Korean authorities may strengthen investigations and sanctions against unregistered virtual asset service providers and those who assist their business activities. Three Types of Illegal Activity Highlighted by the FSC The FSC identified three major types of illegal virtual asset business activities recently observed in Korea. First, overseas exchanges conducting business in Korea without reporting. Even if an exchange is based overseas, Korea’s Specified Financial Information Act may apply if the exchange conducts business targeting Korean users. Factors such as Korean-language websites, KRW payment support, Korean user acquisition events, and domestic marketing activities may be considered together. Second, private stablecoin exchange businesses. Private exchange operators who buy, sell, or exchange stablecoins such as USDT for KRW may also raise legal issues. These services may target foreign students, tourists, foreign residents in Korea, or users who wish to avoid identity exposure. Even if the operator claims that the activity was merely a private exchange, it may still be viewed as an unregistered virtual asset business if repetition, fees, customer solicitation, and business structure are confirmed. Third, SNS-based referral promotion. This refers to cases where a person receives commissions from an overseas virtual asset service provider and promotes that exchange through YouTube, Telegram, open chat rooms, or similar channels. In particular, if the promotion is combined with referral links, invitation codes, fee paybacks, VIP chat rooms, or user-management activities, it may go beyond simple advertising and be viewed as user solicitation or assistance to unregistered business operations. Why Crypto Referral Marketing May Become a Criminal Issue Crypto referral programs are commonly operated in the following structure. 1. Distribution of overseas exchange referral links or invitation codes 2. Receipt of commissions based on referred users’ trading volume 3. Guidance on how to use the exchange through Telegram or open chat rooms 4. Promotion based on events, profit claims, fee discounts, or other incentives 5. Repeated promotion targeting Korean users The legal issue is whether this structure is merely advertising or whether it assists an unregistered virtual asset service provider’s business in Korea. In its press release, the FSC specifically warned against participating in referral or recommendation-link solicitation activities and stated that referrers may also be subject to criminal liability. Therefore, YouTubers, influencers, investment chat room operators, Telegram channel operators, and open chat room administrators may be investigated even if they did not directly operate the exchange. Investigators may review how the promotion was conducted, how referral fees were paid, whether there was a contractual relationship with the exchange, and how Korean users were recruited. Can Private Exchange or OTC Transactions Also Lead to Investigation? The same issue may arise in private exchange or OTC transactions. A person may believe that they were simply buying or selling crypto. However, the following circumstances may raise issues under the Specified Financial Information Act. 1. Repeated transactions with an unspecified number of users 2. Receipt of fees or exchange-rate margins for each transaction 3. Customer solicitation through Telegram, KakaoTalk, or SNS 4. Continuous exchange between KRW and stablecoins such as USDT 5. Brokerage or intermediary activity for the convenience of others The Supreme Court of Korea has also held that, unlike an ordinary exchange user, a person may be considered a virtual asset service provider if they continuously and repeatedly conduct virtual asset transactions for the benefit of an unspecified number of customers or users and receive compensation for doing so. The key issue is whether the activity was simple holding or investment, or whether it can be viewed as repeated, compensated virtual asset transactions conducted as a business. Why Ordinary Users Should Not Simply Assume They Are Safe Using an unregistered exchange or private exchange service does not automatically make a user a suspect under the Specified Financial Information Act. However, the FSC has warned that users of illegal virtual asset operators may face unexpected disadvantages. For example, the user’s funds may become mixed with criminal funds, or the user may become subject to investigation during the process of verifying counterparties and the source of funds. The following situations may make it difficult to characterize the person as a mere user. 1. Sharing referral links with acquaintances and receiving rewards 2. Repeatedly encouraging others to use an unregistered exchange 3. Introducing private exchange transactions and receiving commissions 4. Dealing with funds suspected to be connected to phishing, narcotics, fraud, or other crimes 5. Allowing one’s bank account to be used as a deposit or withdrawal channel for multiple people In such cases, authorities may review not only potential violations of the Specified Financial Information Act, but also issues under the Electronic Financial Transactions Act, the Criminal Proceeds Concealment Act, fraud aiding and abetting, or other money-laundering-related allegations. If You Have Already Been Contacted by Investigators If you have been contacted by the police, KoFIU, or another investigative authority, the first step is to accurately identify your role. The defense strategy will differ depending on whether you were a mere user, promoter, broker, intermediary, or private exchange operator. At the early stage of investigation, it is important to organize the following materials. · How you joined or used the exchange · Referral link or referral code usage history · Commission or fee settlement records · Telegram, KakaoTalk, or open chat room messages · Virtual asset deposit and withdrawal records · KRW bank account transaction records · Contracts or settlement records with overseas exchanges or advertisers · Whether you recruited Korean users The important point is not simply to claim that you were only a user. Before making a statement, it is necessary to analyze how investigators may view the transaction structure, revenue structure, promotion method, user recruitment, repetition, compensation, and awareness of illegality. How Decent Law Firm Can Assist Decent Law Firm has reviewed a wide range of matters involving virtual asset service provider reporting, violations of the Specified Financial Information Act, crypto referral marketing, OTC and P2P transactions, stablecoin exchange, and criminal cases involving overseas exchanges. Virtual asset investigations are not limited to crypto transaction records. Investigative authorities may review Telegram messages, referral-fee settlement structures, relationships with exchanges, KRW bank account flows, wallet address movements, advertising phrases, and user recruitment methods. Before attending an investigative interview, the following issues should be carefully reviewed. 1. Whether the activity constitutes a virtual asset business under the Specified Financial Information Act 2. Whether the alleged unregistered business activity had continuity, repetition, and compensation 3. Whether referral promotion was simple advertising or user solicitation 4. Whether private exchange activity was personal trading or business operation 5. Whether the matter may expand into money laundering or criminal proceeds allegations 6. What should and should not be stated during a police interview If you have been contacted by investigators in relation to crypto referrals, private exchange, or use of an unregistered overseas exchange, legal review before your initial statement is essential. Decent Law Firm’s Virtual Asset Practice Group analyzes the transaction structure and investigation issues together to provide a response strategy tailored to each client’s situation. Key Takeaways The FSC press release dated June 24, 2026 is not merely a general warning about unregistered virtual asset service providers. It clearly indicates that overseas exchanges targeting Korean users, private stablecoin exchange operators, and SNS-based crypto referral promoters may all be subject to investigation under the Specified Financial Information Act.In particular, because the FSC officially mentioned that referral participants may also face criminal liability, YouTubers, influencers, channel operators, and investment chat room operators should immediately review their existing promotion structures. After being contacted by investigators, simply saying that you did not know may not be enough. The first step should be to legally assess whether your conduct may be viewed as business operation, brokerage, intermediation, or solicitation under Korean law. Source: Financial Services Commission, Press Release on Caution Against Using and Trading with Illegal Virtual Asset Operators, June 24, 2026. This content is provided for general informational purposes only and does not constitute legal advice for any specific case.
2026-06-25 Naver Blog -
Blogs
How to File an Unfair Dismissal Remedy Application
If you have lost your job without any prior notice, for reasons that are impossible to understand, or without being given any reason at all, the frustration and sense of injustice can only truly be understood by those who have experienced it. However, if you know “this,” there is no need to panic. Korean labor law clearly provides that an employer may not dismiss an employee without just cause. A dismissal that violates this rule may constitute unfair dismissal, and through a remedy application filed with the Labor Relations Commission, you may be able to seek reinstatement or monetary compensation. In fact, thousands of employees recover their rights every year through unfair dismissal remedy applications. Does This Qualify as Unfair Dismissal? Unfair dismissal refers to a dismissal made without just cause, or a dismissal carried out without following the procedures required by law. If any of the following applies to your situation, you may have grounds to suspect unfair dismissal. - The reason for dismissal is unclear or difficult to accept If you were only told something vague, such as “due to company circumstances” or “you are not a good fit,” without any specific explanation, there may be no legitimate reason for dismissal. - You were suddenly dismissed without prior notice Under the Labor Standards Act, an employer must either give at least 30 days’ advance notice of dismissal or pay at least 30 days’ ordinary wages in lieu of notice. If the employer fails to comply with this requirement, the employer may be obligated to pay dismissal notice allowance and may also be subject to criminal penalties. - You did not receive written notice of dismissal A dismissal must be made in writing, and the written notice must specify both the reason for dismissal and the effective date of dismissal. If you were only notified verbally, the dismissal procedure itself may be unlawful. - It was a managerial dismissal, but the legal requirements were not met For a dismissal due to business reasons, the employer must satisfy strict legal requirements, including urgent managerial necessity, efforts to avoid dismissal, reasonable and fair selection of employees to be dismissed, and prior consultation with employee representatives. - It was a disciplinary dismissal, but no disciplinary committee procedure was followed If the employer ignored disciplinary procedures required under the rules of employment or a collective bargaining agreement, the dismissal may be found unfair due to procedural defects. Please carefully review the points above. If any of them apply, you should actively consider filing a remedy application. How Does an Unfair Dismissal Remedy Application Proceed? Where to file and the deadline An unfair dismissal remedy application is filed with the Regional Labor Relations Commission. The deadline is within three months from the date the dismissal took effect. This is an exclusion period, meaning that once the period expires, the right to file a remedy application itself is extinguished. Procedure Once the application is filed with the Regional Labor Relations Commission, the process generally proceeds in the following order: investigation by an investigator → hearing session → decision. If either party disagrees with the decision, they may file an appeal with the National Labor Relations Commission within 10 days from the date they receive the remedial order or dismissal decision. If no appeal is filed within that period, the decision becomes final and binding. If a party disagrees with the decision of the National Labor Relations Commission, the matter may be further challenged through administrative litigation. What remedies are available? If the remedy application is accepted, the outcome generally falls into one of two categories. Reinstatement : The employee is reinstated to their original position, and the employer must also pay wages equivalent to what the employee would have earned during the dismissal period. Monetary compensation order : If the employee does not wish to return to work, they may choose monetary compensation instead. In this case, compensation is generally calculated based on the wages equivalent to the period from the date of dismissal to the date of the decision. Unlike a reinstatement order, where wages equivalent to the period from dismissal until actual reinstatement may be paid, the calculation period for monetary compensation ends on the date of the decision. Therefore, the longer the proceedings continue, the greater the difference in compensation may become between the two options. What if the company proposes a settlement during the proceedings? It is not uncommon for an employer to propose a settlement while the remedy application is ongoing. The amount of settlement compensation can vary significantly depending on the circumstances of the case. Therefore, if you receive a settlement proposal, it is important to have an expert review whether the proposed amount is appropriate. There are also several points that must be checked before entering into a settlement. Whether the settlement may affect your eligibility for unemployment benefits Whether the settlement terms include unfavorable clauses, such as waiver of future claims or litigation rights Whether there are still unpaid wages, severance pay, or other outstanding amounts separate from the settlement payment Before signing any settlement agreement, you must carefully review its contents. Can I Receive Unemployment Benefits After Being Unfairly Dismissed? Yes, you may be eligible. Unemployment benefits are generally available when the employee’s separation from employment is involuntary, rather than a voluntary resignation. Because unfair dismissal is a unilateral termination made against the employee’s will, it may be recognized as involuntary separation, making the employee eligible for unemployment benefits. You may also apply for unemployment benefits while the unfair dismissal remedy procedure is still ongoing. However, if the Labor Relations Commission later issues a reinstatement order, the employee’s unemployment status may be deemed to have been retroactively resolved as of the date of the reinstatement order, regardless of whether the employee actually returns to work or receives wages. As a result, there may be situations where unemployment benefits already received must be returned. This is something you should keep in mind in advance. You should also confirm in advance whether you meet the eligibility requirements, such as having at least 180 insured working days under employment insurance during the 18-month base period prior to the date of separation. You Do Not Have to Go Through This Difficult Process Alone What can go wrong if you handle it alone? In an unfair dismissal remedy case, the employer bears the burden of proving that the dismissal was justified. However, in practice, employees may still be placed at a disadvantage if they fail to secure proper evidence or make procedural mistakes. Employers often immediately appoint legal counsel or certified labor consultants to respond to the claim. This creates a significant gap in information and preparation from the very beginning. In particular, when a settlement proposal is made, it can be extremely difficult to determine on your own whether the proposed amount is reasonable or whether the settlement terms contain unfavorable provisions. You must also strategically decide which option is most beneficial for you: reinstatement, monetary compensation, or settlement. A single mistake in the early stages can completely change the outcome of the case. How Decent Law Office Can Help - Review of the dismissal circumstances and assessment of unfair dismissal We carefully analyze the circumstances of the dismissal, the stated reasons, and the procedures followed, and first assess the likelihood of obtaining relief. - Preparation of remedy application documents and representation throughout the procedure From preparing the application to responding at the hearing session, we assist you throughout the entire Labor Relations Commission process. - Settlement negotiation support We review whether the employer’s settlement proposal is appropriate and negotiate toward terms that are more favorable to our client. - Strategic selection of the best direction — reinstatement, monetary compensation, or settlement Our goal is not simply to “win.” We develop a strategy aimed at achieving the best possible outcome based on each client’s circumstances and objectives. If you have unfairly lost your job, Decent Law Office will stand with you until the end. Before it is too late, we recommend seeking legal advice first.
2026-06-25 Naver Blog -
Media Coverage
Polymarket and Illegal Gambling in Korea: Can Users Face Criminal Charges?
Background of the Polymarket Investigation Polymarket is an overseas prediction market platform where users trade on the probability of future events, such as election results, economic indicators, and policy decisions. From a user’s perspective, Polymarket may appear closer to an investment platform or an information-based trading service than a conventional gambling site. However, the fact that a platform operates overseas does not automatically exclude the possibility of criminal liability under Korean law. If a user accesses the platform from Korea, deposits cryptocurrency such as USDC, and gains or loses money depending on the outcome of future events, Korean investigative authorities may review whether the conduct constitutes gambling under the Korean Criminal Act. Recent reports indicate that the Gangwon Provincial Police Agency’s Cyber Investigation Division has been investigating Korean Polymarket users on suspicion of gambling. The police are reportedly identifying users by tracing cryptocurrency transfers from domestic virtual asset exchanges. In other words, the belief that an overseas service is lawful abroad does not necessarily mean that using the service from Korea is also free from criminal risk. Elements of Gambling Under Korean Criminal Law Article 246 of the Korean Criminal Act provides punishment for gambling and habitual gambling. A person who gambles may be punished by a fine of up to KRW 10 million. If the conduct is considered habitual gambling, the punishment may be imprisonment for up to three years or a fine of up to KRW 20 million. Under Korean Supreme Court precedent, gambling is generally understood as an act of risking property or economic value and determining gain or loss by chance. Whether Polymarket use satisfies these elements may depend on the following factors. Element Application to Polymarket Key Issue Economic value Users deposit stablecoins such as USDC and may earn profits Relatively clear Chance User analysis may be involved, but the result depends on external events Core issue Temporary amusement exception Article 246 provides an exception for mere temporary amusement Depends on frequency and scale The Key Issue: Chance The most important legal issue is whether Polymarket trading involves “chance” in the sense required for gambling under Korean law. The Korean Supreme Court has held that even where a participant’s skill or ability affects the outcome, gambling may still be found if the result is influenced, even in part, by circumstances of chance. Supreme Court Decision 2006Do736, decided October 23, 2008 This means that even if a user analyzes political, economic, or market information before making a prediction, the fact that the final outcome depends on external events outside the user’s control may still raise a gambling-law issue. This is likely one of the reasons investigative authorities may view Polymarket differently from ordinary financial investment. At the same time, there does not yet appear to be a publicly confirmed final court or prosecution decision in Korea directly addressing whether Polymarket use itself constitutes gambling. An investigation or summons does not mean that a user has already been found guilty. The legal assessment may vary depending on the user’s specific circumstances, including how and why the platform was used. Key Points for Users Under Investigation In a Polymarket-related investigation, the following issues should be carefully reviewed. 1. Use of the platform and criminal liability are separate issues The existence of cryptocurrency transfer records does not automatically mean that gambling has been legally established. Admitting that a platform was used is different from admitting that the conduct satisfies the legal elements of gambling. 2. The user’s purpose and understanding matter It is important to explain why the user accessed Polymarket, how the user understood the service, and whether the user reasonably perceived it as a prediction market or investment-like platform. This should be organized before attending a police interview. 3. The temporary amusement exception may need to be reviewed Under Article 246 of the Korean Criminal Act, conduct that is merely temporary amusement may be excluded from punishment. Whether this exception may apply depends on the number of transactions, the amount involved, the period of use, and the overall pattern of activity. 4. Records should be preserved If investigative authorities have already obtained on-chain transaction data or exchange deposit and withdrawal records, deleting or modifying materials may be interpreted unfavorably. Rather than altering records, users should preserve relevant materials and organize the facts accurately. How Decent Law Firm Can Assist Polymarket-related gambling investigations require a combined understanding of virtual asset transactions, Korean gambling law, and criminal investigation strategy. Decent Law Firm’s virtual asset team has practical experience in handling early-stage investigations involving Polymarket and other overseas crypto-related platforms. If you have received a summons or are concerned that your Polymarket activity may become subject to investigation in Korea, it is important to review your legal position before confirming or attending a police interview. Early legal review can help determine which facts should be clearly explained, which legal issues may be disputed, and how to avoid statements that could be misunderstood during the investigation. This content is provided for general informational purposes only and does not constitute legal advice for any specific case.
2026-06-19 Naver Blog
