-
BlogsCrypto 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
Startup M&A: Why It’s Back in Focus in 2026—and How to Use It Strategically
M&A is no longer a last resort. It has become a core strategy for accelerating growth. The global M&A market has clearly entered a recovery phase in 2026. As the pace of technological change continues to accelerate, companies are finding it increasingly difficult to keep up through internal development alone. As a result, acquiring critical technologies, data, and platforms through M&A has become a more prominent and practical strategy. This shift is especially visible in the startup ecosystem. Startup M&A as a Growth Strategy Today, many founders no longer view M&A as something to consider only when the company is struggling. Instead, it is increasingly used as a proactive tool to scale faster. Raising capital alone often has limits—whether in expanding market share, building in-house technology, or hiring top-tier talent. Acquiring a company with the capabilities you need can be a far more efficient solution. Common M&A approaches include: Horizontal Integration: Acquiring competitors or similar services to rapidly expand customer base and revenue (common in e-commerce, SaaS, and platform businesses) Acqui-hire: Acquiring teams with strong technical capabilities to secure both talent and intellectual property (frequent in AI, fintech, and legal tech) AI Roll-up Strategy: Acquiring underperforming companies and improving operational efficiency through AI (applicable across industries) In particular, industries such as healthcare, logistics, and legal tech—where data and automation are critical—are seeing a growing number of cases where larger SaaS companies acquire AI startups to enhance their product offerings. The Korean Market and Key Strategic Sectors In Korea, investment capital in 2026 is being concentrated in six key sectors: AI, biotech, content, defense, energy, and advanced manufacturing. Alongside this trend, founders are increasingly thinking beyond the traditional “fundraising → growth” model. Instead, a more strategic cycle is emerging: fundraising → strategic M&A → accelerated growth For startups operating with limited resources but facing intense competition, M&A can be one of the most powerful tools to quickly expand market presence and reshape the competitive landscape. When Should Your Company Consider M&A? For startups and growth-stage companies, there are several practical scenarios where M&A becomes highly relevant: Market Entry: When you need immediate access to local networks or infrastructure in a new market Technology Bottlenecks: When critical technology already exists externally but would take years to build in-house Team Building Challenges: When you want to onboard a proven, high-performing team at once Post-Investment Strategy: When you need to deploy capital efficiently after a major funding round However, M&A should never be pursued as an end in itself. A single transaction can impact shareholding structure, control, investor relations, tax, and employment matters. Without a clear post-merger integration (PMI) plan, even a well-executed deal may fail to deliver meaningful results. For Companies Considering M&A At Decent Law Firm, our Corporate Practice Group provides end-to-end legal support for startups, venture-backed companies, and SMEs throughout the entire M&A lifecycle. Our services include: Structuring and negotiating share purchase and asset transfer agreements Reviewing investment agreements and shareholder arrangements Conducting legal due diligence and transaction structuring Managing legal risks during post-merger integration (PMI) We approach M&A not as a one-time transaction, but as a continuous strategic process that directly impacts your company’s long-term growth. Ultimately, the key question is not whether to pursue M&A, but when and how to use it effectively. The right approach depends entirely on your company’s stage, resources, and strategic goals. If you are exploring whether M&A could be a viable growth strategy for your business, we encourage you to reach out. Our team will work closely with you to assess realistic options and design a tailored approach aligned with your objectives.
2026-04-27 Naver Blog -
Blogs
Custody Review in Korea: Lawyer Fees and Release Within 48 Hours
1. What Is a Custody Review (구속적부심사)? When a family member or close contact is suddenly detained, most people are unsure what to do next. However, even after detention, there is a legal procedure in Korea that allows you to request release through the court—this is called a custody review (구속적부심사). A custody review is a process where the court re-examines whether the detention is lawful and necessary. Even if a detention warrant has already been issued, the detainee may be released if the grounds for detention are insufficient or excessive. The procedure moves very quickly: Filing deadline: Within 7 days from the date of detention Court hearing: Within 48 hours after filing Decision: Typically within 24 hours after the hearing The request can be filed not only by the detainee, but also by a spouse, immediate family member, or attorney. 2. Why Hiring a Lawyer Is Critical A custody review is effectively a one-time opportunity. In principle, it cannot be refiled, which means the initial strategy is crucial. In practice, cases handled with legal representation show a significantly higher likelihood of release compared to those without. This is because an experienced criminal defense lawyer will: Analyze and challenge the legal basis for detention Rebut concerns about flight risk or evidence tampering Present strong personal circumstances (residence, employment, family ties) Structure persuasive arguments tailored to the court’s decision-making Given the extremely limited preparation window of 48 hours, professional legal support can directly impact the outcome. 3. Lawyer Fees for Custody Review Legal fees for a custody review vary depending on the complexity of the case and the experience of the lawyer. In general: Starting from approximately KRW 3 million Can exceed KRW 10 million for complex or serious cases However, more important than the cost is the lawyer’s ability to respond immediately. In custody review cases, speed and coordination often matter more than the fee itself. 4. What to Look for When Choosing a Lawyer In urgent detention situations, the right lawyer can make a decisive difference. You should focus on the following: • Immediate client access (detention visit) A lawyer must meet the detainee as soon as possible to understand the case details, prior statements, and investigation status. Early intervention prevents unfavorable statements from being solidified. • Hearing preparation Court hearings are often brief—sometimes just 10 to 20 minutes. The detainee must be prepared in advance on how to respond clearly and calmly. Without preparation, nervous or inconsistent answers may negatively affect the outcome. • Evidence and document preparation Key supporting documents—such as proof of residence, employment certificates, family records, medical documents, and written statements—must be gathered within 48 hours. Identifying and organizing these effectively requires legal experience. 5. What You Should Do Immediately After Detention If someone close to you has been detained, you should promptly check the following: Whether the 7-day filing window has passed Whether the stated grounds for detention are excessive or inaccurate Whether a lawyer can be appointed immediately for rapid response Delays at this stage can significantly reduce the chances of release. Decent Law Firm – Criminal Defense Team A custody review is a race against time. The outcome depends on how quickly and strategically the case is handled. Decent Law Firm provides: Emergency detention visits Preparation and filing of custody review petitions Full representation at court hearings Detention is not the end—it is the beginning of legal response. The 48-hour window is critical. Acting quickly can make all the difference.
2026-04-27 Naver Blog -
Blogs
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
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 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
