We Resolve Legal Matters
How can we assist you?
Blogs
More-
Settlement in 12 Major Traffic Violation Cases: Criminal Settlement and Insurance Compensation Explained
1. Which Accidents Qualify as One of the 12 Major Traffic Violations? The "12 major traffic violations" do not simply refer to accidents where the driver is judged to be seriously at fault. Under the proviso to Article 3(2) of the Act on Special Cases Concerning the Settlement of Traffic Accidents, they refer specifically to accidents in which a person is injured as a result of violating one of twelve enumerated traffic rules. In an ordinary traffic accident, the driver may be exempt from criminal prosecution under the special provisions if the victim does not wish to press charges, or if the driver is covered by a qualifying comprehensive insurance policy. However, in accidents involving one of the 12 major violations, investigation and prosecution can proceed even if the victim does not wish to press charges, and holding comprehensive insurance alone does not necessarily end the criminal process. Article 3(1) of the Act on Special Cases Concerning the Settlement of Traffic Accidents provides that a person who causes injury through occupational negligence or gross negligence in a traffic accident may be punished by imprisonment for up to five years or a fine of up to KRW 20 million. The 12 Specific Categories of Major Violations Violation of traffic signals or instructions — whether the vehicle signal, a police officer's signal, or a no-passing/stop sign was violated Crossing the centerline — centerline crossing, or prohibited crossing, U-turns, or reversing Exceeding the speed limit by more than 20 km/h — the posted speed limit at the accident site versus the actual driving speed Improper overtaking or cutting in — whether the method, location, or timing of overtaking, or the prohibition on cutting in, was violated Improper railroad crossing procedure — whether the legally required stop-and-check procedure was followed Failure to protect pedestrians at a crosswalk — whether the pedestrian was crossing within the marked crosswalk Driving without a valid license — whether the license was suspended or revoked, or the driver lacked the license class required for the vehicle Driving under the influence of alcohol or drugs — blood alcohol level, whether normal driving was impaired, and the effect of any drugs Driving on the sidewalk — whether the vehicle entered or improperly crossed the sidewalk Failure to secure passengers before departure — whether doors were closed and other safety measures were taken before the vehicle moved Failure to exercise due care in a school zone — whether a child was injured within a designated school zone Failure to secure cargo — whether necessary measures were taken to prevent cargo from falling Formally falling within one of these categories does not automatically determine the outcome of a case. There must be a causal link between the specific violation and the victim's injury, which requires a detailed review of the actual signal status, the vehicles' positions, the point of impact, the speed limit, and the pedestrian's path of movement, among other factors. 2. How Do Criminal Settlement and Insurance Settlement Differ? The civil settlement handled by an insurance company and the criminal settlement a driver seeks directly from the victim are two separate processes. Payment of insurance proceeds does not, by itself, complete a criminal settlement, and conversely, reaching a criminal settlement does not necessarily resolve every civil damages issue the insurance company is responsible for. A civil settlement is intended to compensate the victim for the property and emotional damage caused by the accident. A criminal settlement, by contrast, carries the important additional meaning that the victim expresses a wish not to see the driver criminally punished, alongside compensation for the harm suffered. However, paying a criminal settlement amount does not always mean that amount is treated as entirely separate from civil damages. How the legal relationship develops afterward can depend on how the settlement agreement characterizes the payment and its relationship to civil damages and insurance claims. For this reason, the following points should be clearly confirmed when drafting a criminal settlement agreement. The legal character of the amount being paid Its relationship to the damages the victim will receive from the insurance company Whether additional civil claims will be permitted The scope of the victim's expressed wish not to see the driver punished Whether an additional claim will be possible if aftereffects develop later 3. What Determines the Amount of a Settlement in a 12-Major-Violation Case? There is no fixed schedule of amounts set by law for settlements in 12-major-violation cases. Rather than a uniform calculation, the amount must be negotiated by weighing the severity of the injury, the gravity of the accident, the risk of criminal punishment, and the actual extent of recovery achieved. The Severity of the Victim's Injury Whether the case involves a serious injury is treated as an important aggravating factor in traffic-accident-injury cases. The Degree of Illegality and Fault in the Accident Cases involving two or more overlapping major-violation grounds, or reckless driving, may be assessed as cases of "heightened illegality." Aftereffects and Loss of Income If the victim has been unable to work for an extended period, or has suffered a reduction in working capacity, the resulting damages can extend well beyond medical costs. The Victim's Own Fault If the victim's own conduct — such as running a red light, speeding, failing to wear safety equipment, or an unpredictable jaywalking crossing — contributed to the accident or increased the damage, this can be reflected in the calculation of civil damages. Whether Comprehensive and Driver's Insurance Are in Place If the driver holds comprehensive auto insurance, a substantial portion of the civil damages can be covered through that insurance. However, because holding comprehensive insurance alone is unlikely to secure the special exemption from criminal punishment in a 12-major-violation case, the need for a separate criminal settlement can still arise. The Risk of Criminal Punishment The importance of reaching a settlement increases where circumstances such as the following are present. The victim suffered a serious injury There are multiple victims Drunk driving or driving without a license is also at issue A child was injured in a school zone Two or more major violations overlap The driver has a prior record of similar traffic offenses The victim is requesting severe punishment 4. Does Reaching a Settlement with the Victim Guarantee Avoiding Criminal Punishment? Article 3(2) of the Act on Special Cases Concerning the Settlement of Traffic Accidents bars prosecution against the victim's express wishes in an ordinary traffic accident, but this special provision does not apply to accidents involving one of the 12 major violations. Accordingly, even if the victim submits a statement declining to press charges, the police investigation and the prosecutor's charging decision can still proceed. That said, a settlement can still have a significant effect on the severity of the criminal punishment imposed. The traffic-crime sentencing guidelines that took effect on July 1, 2026 list the following as mitigating factors in cases involving traffic-related injury or death. The victim's expressed wish against punishment Substantial recovery of the harm caused Meaningful recovery of the damage Holding comprehensive auto insurance Genuine remorse No prior record of criminal punishment Conversely, factors such as serious injury, a major violation involving heightened illegality, a prior record of similar offenses, or pressuring the victim during settlement negotiations can work against the driver. It is important to acknowledge the circumstances of the accident, offer a sincere apology, check on the victim's treatment and recovery, and objectively identify what harm remains uncompensated by insurance. 5. How Should You Prepare for a Settlement After a 12-Major-Violation Accident? If a 12-major-violation accident has occurred, the first step is not to propose a settlement amount, but to first organize the type of accident and the scope of the harm. Confirming Whether the 12-Major-Violation Provision Applies It is necessary to confirm whether the specific violation identified by the police is consistent with the actual accident record. [Evidence to Secure] The original dashcam footage from your vehicle Dashcam footage from nearby vehicles CCTV footage from intersections or nearby businesses Photographs of the accident scene The traffic signal cycle chart Vehicle speed data Navigation driving records The police-prepared traffic accident investigation report Witness contact information and statements In particular, whether a signal violation, a crosswalk accident, or centerline crossing occurred can turn on the exact point of impact and the vehicles' paths immediately before the collision. Confirming the Severity of the Victim's Injury The number of weeks of diagnosed recovery time alone does not determine the settlement amount. The following materials should be reviewed together. Medical certificates and injury diagnosis reports Surgical records Admission and discharge confirmations Future treatment plans The likelihood of lasting aftereffects Records of lost work or reduced income The treatment costs and settlement amounts already paid by the insurer If there are multiple victims, each victim's degree of injury and insurance treatment should be assessed separately. Also, if the victim declines to be contacted but is nonetheless repeatedly called, or family members or the workplace are contacted, this can be treated as secondary harm. The sentencing guidelines also treat persistently pressuring a victim, or hinting at disadvantages to them, during settlement negotiations as an unfavorable sentencing factor — so if the victim does not wish to be contacted directly, conveying your position through legal counsel is worth considering. 6. Frequently Asked Questions (FAQ) Q1. Is there a fixed settlement amount per week of diagnosed recovery time in 12-major-violation cases? There is no legal standard requiring a fixed amount per week of diagnosed recovery. The number of weeks is only one of several factors used to assess injury severity — surgery, length of hospitalization, aftereffects, the victim's occupation and income, the fault ratio, the insurance compensation already paid, and the risk of criminal punishment are all considered together. Q2. Do I still need a criminal settlement even if I have comprehensive auto insurance? In 12-major-violation cases, holding comprehensive insurance alone may not conclude the criminal process, so the need for a separate criminal settlement can still arise. That said, a criminal settlement is not always required in every case. It is necessary to comprehensively review whether the injury is minor, whether the harm has already been sufficiently recovered through insurance, whether the victim wants the driver punished, and whether the driver has a record of similar offenses. Q3. What should I do if the victim demands an excessive settlement amount? Rather than immediately accepting the demanded amount or reacting emotionally by refusing it, the basis for the figure should be reviewed. It is worth first examining the treatment costs and damages already paid by insurance, the severity of the injury, the likelihood of lasting aftereffects, the actual loss of income, and the likely criminal disposition in comparable cases. 7. Points to Keep in Mind There is no fixed market rate or standard formula tied to weeks of diagnosed recovery for settlements in 12-major-violation cases. The severity of the victim's injury, the likelihood of lasting aftereffects, the fault ratio, the insurance treatment history, the type of major violation involved, and the driver's prior record are the key factors that determine both the scope of settlement and the criminal outcome — and because the specific wording of the settlement agreement can determine whether the criminal settlement amount is treated as civil damages, or whether future claims are limited, the scope of the settlement should be confirmed before any payment is made or any signature given. Because a 12-major-violation accident requires reviewing the accident record, medical materials, and insurance treatment history together to determine the right course of action, anyone facing a police investigation or a settlement negotiation with a victim should first consult an attorney experienced in this area to review which major-violation category applies and the legal effect of the settlement agreement.
-
Bitcoin and Drug Transactions in Korea — Applicable Laws and Legal Considerations
This article explains the laws that apply when Bitcoin or other cryptocurrency is used as a means of transferring drug transaction payments, or when drug-related funds flow into a cryptocurrency over-the-counter (OTC) operation. It also outlines how Korean investigative authorities assess culpability and what legal issues arise in these cases. 1. How Cryptocurrency Becomes Linked to Drug Trafficking Bitcoin and other virtual assets have become increasingly exploited as a means of transferring drug transaction payments, primarily due to their perceived anonymity and the ability to send funds across borders instantly. A common structure involves a drug buyer depositing cash into an OTC channel, which then purchases Bitcoin and transfers it to a wallet address specified by the seller. Korean law enforcement has responded by establishing dedicated cryptocurrency investigation units to pursue these cases. In a recent large-scale operation, the Gyeonggi Southern Police Agency investigated a drug network operating through Bitcoin and Telegram over approximately one year, arresting 122 individuals and detaining 47 of them pending prosecution. 2. Applicable Laws and Penalties In cases where drug-related funds are traced through a cryptocurrency OTC operation, investigators do not limit their approach to a single charge. Multiple laws are applied concurrently as a combined offense. 1) Aiding and Abetting under the Narcotics Control Act (Criminal Act, Article 32) Even without directly purchasing, selling, or distributing narcotics, a person who facilitates the transfer of drug transaction payments via Bitcoin may be prosecuted as an accomplice. Korean police have confirmed that individuals who assist in drug distribution through online virtual asset transactions — without ever meeting the drug dealer — can be charged with aiding and abetting under the Narcotics Control Act. Under Article 58(1) of the Narcotics Control Act, the principal offender in a drug sale faces life imprisonment or a minimum of five years in prison. An accomplice, after the statutory reduction of one-half under Article 32(2) of the Criminal Act, may still face a minimum of two years and six months of imprisonment. This is not a minor charge. 2) Act on Reporting and Using Specified Financial Transaction Information (ARUSFTI) Violation Operating an unlicensed virtual asset exchange service for profit — without registering with the Financial Intelligence Unit (FIU) — constitutes a violation of Article 7(1) of the ARUSFTI, punishable under Article 17(1) by up to five years in prison or a fine of up to KRW 50 million. The key factor is "business continuity." Unlike a one-time transaction between acquaintances, repeated exchanges conducted for profit establish the commercial nature of the activity, making criminal prosecution far more straightforward for investigators. 3) Act on Regulation and Punishment of Criminal Proceeds Concealment (ARPCPC), Article 3 If a person transfers or converts funds while being aware — even vaguely — that those funds derive from illegal activity, this constitutes concealment or disguising of criminal proceeds. It is not necessary to know the specific nature of the crime. The penalty is up to five years in prison or a fine of up to KRW 30 million. 3. The Central Legal Issue: How Authorities Establish Criminal Intent The most common defense in cryptocurrency OTC cases is: "I had no idea the funds were related to drugs." However, Korean courts have consistently held that full knowledge of the specific crime is not required. "Such recognition is sufficient if the person was aware that the relevant property constitutes criminal proceeds as defined under the law — it is not necessary to know the specific type of crime or its concrete details." — Supreme Court of Korea, January 11, 2007, Decision 2006Do5288 In actual drug-related cryptocurrency cases, prosecutors and police have framed criminal intent in charging documents as follows: the suspect "transferred Bitcoin after recognizing and anticipating that the payment constituted the proceeds of narcotics transactions." This framing — recognition and anticipation — is how investigators establish what Korean law calls dolus eventualis (indirect intent, or awareness of probable consequences). The external circumstances investigators use to infer this intent include: Informal transaction structure: Conducting transactions through Telegram rather than a licensed exchange, receiving funds via anonymous bank deposits Abnormally high commission rates: Charging 10–16% per transaction, far exceeding standard exchange fees. Investigators treat this as compensation for the legal risk — effectively a premium for facilitating illegal activity No customer verification (KYC): Failing to confirm the identity, purpose, or source of funds from any counterparty Concentration of transfers to a single wallet: The majority of Bitcoin transfers flowing consistently to the same wallet address, later identified as belonging to a drug seller Continued operation after prior investigation: Resuming OTC operations after having already been investigated for a related matter When these factors are present in combination, investigators build the case that the suspect could not reasonably have been unaware of the illegal nature of the transactions. 4. How Korean Authorities Track Cryptocurrency Transactions The assumption that cryptocurrency transactions are untraceable is no longer accurate. Korean law enforcement employs sophisticated methods to follow the money. ▪️Blockchain Forensics and On-Chain Data Analysis Every Bitcoin transaction — its timestamp, wallet address, and amount — is permanently recorded on the blockchain and cannot be deleted. Once a drug seller's wallet address is identified, all wallet addresses that transferred Bitcoin to that address are immediately traceable, including OTC operators and their associated bank accounts. ▪️Exchange Warrants and Account Seizure Domestic cryptocurrency exchanges are required by law to provide account information, transaction records, and identity verification data upon receipt of a warrant. A single transaction routed through a Korean exchange is sufficient for investigators to identify a person. The Supreme Court of Korea ruled in December 2025 that seizure of Bitcoin held in exchange-linked wallets is lawful, further expanding the investigative reach of authorities in cryptocurrency-related cases. 5. Key Legal Considerations If You Have Been Contacted by Authorities ▪️Clarify the Scope of the Charges Early Aiding and abetting under the Narcotics Control Act, violations of the ARUSFTI, and violations of the ARPCPC each have different legal elements. Understanding which charges are actually in play — and designing a response strategy for each — should happen at the earliest possible stage. ▪️Objective Demonstration That Criminal Intent Was Absent Saying "I didn't know" is not a legal defense in itself. What is required is an objective and documented account of why the transactions could reasonably have appeared legitimate — including any deception by the counterparty regarding their identity or the purpose of the funds. Relevant materials may include messaging records, transaction logs, and contemporaneous communications. ▪️The First Police Interview Is Critical By the time investigators issue a summons, they have typically already obtained blockchain analysis results and financial records. Statements made in the first interview that are inconsistent with documentary evidence can be used to confirm the existence of criminal intent. It is strongly advisable to consult a legal professional and establish a clear statement strategy before attending any police interview. DECENT Law Firm — Virtual Asset Practice Group Cases involving Bitcoin and drug transactions in Korea sit at the intersection of criminal law, the Narcotics Control Act, financial regulation, and blockchain forensics. Each charge carries distinct legal elements and requires a tailored defense strategy. DECENT Law Firm's Virtual Asset Practice Group has hands-on experience handling virtual asset-related narcotics investigations from the initial investigation stage through to trial. If you have been contacted by Korean law enforcement or are uncertain about the scope of the allegations against you, we recommend seeking legal advice before your first interview. This article is intended for general informational purposes only and does not constitute legal advice for any specific case or individual situation.
-
Algorithm Trading Scams in Korea: How to Report AI Auto-Trading Fraud
Victims who invested based on promises of "stable returns through AI auto-trading" are increasingly finding themselves unable to recover even their principal. The one thing they all have in common: the regret of not having been suspicious sooner. What These Scams Actually Look Like The common thread running through recent algorithm trading fraud cases in Korea is the use of AI, algorithmic trading, and automated systems as a front for stock or ETF investment schemes. In one documented case, operators raised over 20 billion KRW by promising "stable, loss-free returns through US stocks and ETFs" — while showing investors fabricated account balance screens with no actual trading taking place. These operations typically manipulate their own apps or websites to display fictitious profits, then demand additional deposits under the guise of taxes, fees, or withdrawal processing charges. In most cases, the underlying structure is a classic Ponzi scheme — using new investor funds to pay returns to earlier participants. Warning Signs to Watch For If the service you're using matches any of the following, treat it as a serious red flag. • Impossible guarantees — Claims of loss-free stable returns, fixed monthly gains of 10–15%, or annual returns of 600% or more. These figures are not achievable through legitimate financial products. • Zero transparency — No explanation of which assets or strategies are being used. Just repeated assurances that "the AI handles everything." • Non-standard trading infrastructure — Use of a proprietary app or website rather than a licensed brokerage platform. Deposit accounts held in individual names or virtual accounts rather than a registered corporate entity. • False authority — Fabricated or exaggerated claims of affiliation with globally recognized asset managers, academics, or financial regulators. If anything feels off, stop sending money immediately and start preserving evidence. If You've Already Been Victimized: What to Do Now If you've transferred funds and suspect fraud, the priority is evidence preservation — not confronting the operator. Step 1 — Preserve all evidence Save everything: promotional messages, KakaoTalk or Telegram conversations, promotional materials and contracts, screenshots of the app or website showing balances, returns, and withdrawal requests (do this before the site goes dark), and full records of all deposits and withdrawals. Step 2 — Report to the Financial Supervisory Service File a report with the FSS Illegal Financial Investment Reporting Center. Submissions are cross-referenced with similar cases and can trigger coordinated investigations. Step 3 — File a criminal complaint A formal complaint can be filed with the police or prosecutor's office on charges of fraud, and where applicable, violation of the Act on the Regulation of Similar Receiving of Investments. When multiple victims file simultaneously, cases are often escalated to joint task force investigations. In parallel with criminal proceedings, civil remedies — including provisional seizure of the perpetrator's assets and claims for damages — should be considered to maximize the likelihood of actual recovery. How Decent Law Firm Can Help Algorithm trading fraud is structurally designed to look like a legitimate investment service, which makes it genuinely difficult to distinguish from an ordinary investment loss. Building a case requires systematically documenting what misrepresentations were made, who was involved, and at what point the fraudulent structure was in place. Decent Law Firm's Litigation Practice reconstructs the fraud architecture and the specific points of deception using contracts, messaging records, and app screenshots — and designs a coordinated strategy combining criminal prosecution with civil asset recovery. If you were promised high returns through AI auto-trading or algorithmic investment, and you're now experiencing withdrawal delays, demands for additional deposits, or complete loss of contact, don't wait. Contact Decent Law Firm's Litigation Practice today.
-
Minimizing Risks Related to Criminal Penalties, Fines, and Confiscation in Tax Evasion Cases
Transition Process Toward Criminal Exposure Most tax evasion cases begin at the stage of a tax audit. However, where a certain scale of underreporting and intentional misconduct is identified, the process commonly progresses from a tax audit to a criminal tax investigation conducted by specialized investigation units, and ultimately to a criminal referral to the prosecution. This is why matters initially expected to conclude with administrative penalties may later evolve into full criminal proceedings. In practice, many taxpayers fail to clearly distinguish between cases that may be resolved through administrative tax measures and those that carry genuine criminal exposure, resulting in missed opportunities for timely and appropriate strategic response. In particular, where deliberate concealment structures—such as false reporting, suppression of sales, or the use of nominee accounts or nominee corporations—are identified during the audit stage, criminal exposure should already be considered substantially realized. At this point, whether and how an early strategic response is made can significantly affect the likelihood of criminal prosecution, the possibility of non-prosecution, the scope of confiscation, and sentencing outcomes. Actual Criminal Penalties Applicable Upon a Finding of Tax Evasion Tax evasion constitutes a criminal offense under the Punishment of Tax Evaders Act. Where intentional tax evasion is established, liability extends beyond administrative sanctions and results in criminal responsibility. Under the Act, general tax evasion is punishable by imprisonment of up to two years or a fine of up to twice the amount of the evaded tax. Where the evaded tax amount exceeds KRW 300 million and represents at least 30% of the tax due, or exceeds KRW 500 million, enhanced penalties apply, including imprisonment of up to three years or a fine of up to three times the evaded tax. The applicable statutory framework and penalty levels vary depending on the amount of tax evaded. If the annual evaded tax amount ranges between KRW 500 million and KRW 1 billion, Article 8 of the Act on the Aggravated Punishment of Specific Crimes may apply, resulting in imprisonment of not less than three years and a fine of two to five times the evaded tax, imposed concurrently. If the annual evaded tax amount exceeds KRW 1 billion, the statute provides for life imprisonment or imprisonment for not less than five years, together with a fine of two to five times the evaded tax. In practice, decisions regarding detention and sentencing are influenced not only by the amount of tax evaded, but also by the degree of intent, repetition or habitual conduct, and whether the evasion involved systematic or organized concealment. Treating tax evasion solely as a financial issue involving penalties or additional taxes—while overlooking criminal exposure—can result in an unexpected and substantial risk of actual imprisonment. Confiscation and Tax Surcharges: Often More Burdensome Than Criminal Sentencing In tax evasion cases, confiscation and additional tax surcharges arise independently of imprisonment and criminal fines imposed by the criminal court. Confiscation in criminal proceedings serves as a property-based sanction designed to recover economic benefits obtained through unlawful conduct, while administrative tax procedures may impose additional taxes and surcharges under the Framework Act on National Taxes and related tax statutes. Key issues in calculating confiscation include identifying the true beneficiary of the income, determining the scope of concealed income, and assessing discrepancies between nominal ownership and substantive control, particularly in cases involving nominee structures. When compounded with tax surcharges, the overall financial burden may become irrecoverable, even where the custodial sentence itself is relatively limited. In practice, confiscation and additional tax liabilities often result in more severe consequences than criminal fines alone. How Decent Law Firm Handles Tax Evasion Cases as Criminal Matters Tax evasion cases must not be addressed by separating tax procedures from criminal defense. Because statements and materials submitted during audits and investigations directly affect criminal liability, Decent Law Firm formulates defense strategies from a criminal law perspective at the earliest stage. We focus on challenging the existence of criminal intent and limiting the scope of liability, with the objective of minimizing both sentencing exposure and confiscation risk. If notice of a criminal tax investigation has already been issued, or if allegations of concealment or false reporting have arisen during a tax audit, immediate action is critical. Once the appropriate response window has passed, the risks associated with criminal penalties and confiscation in tax evasion cases may become irreversible.
-
Legal Counsel for Cryptocurrency Investment Fraud Investigations
Police Investigation Stage: Key Issues, Defense Strategy, and Attorney’s Fees Not all disputes arising from cryptocurrency investments lead to criminal prosecution. Under Korean criminal law, fraud is established only where there is clear evidence that the accused had intent to deceive from the outset. Mere investment losses or business failure do not, by themselves, constitute criminal fraud. In investigative practice, authorities tend to focus on cases involving patterns such as: Investment solicitations disguised as private sales, Guarantees of principal or fixed high returns, or Repeated promises of unrealistically high profits. However, where actual investment execution took place and losses resulted from changes in market conditions, such cases may be more appropriately classified as civil disputes involving breach of contract, rather than criminal offenses. Ultimately, police investigations into alleged cryptocurrency investment fraud revolve around two core issues: Whether there was intent to deceive at the time of solicitation, and How the invested funds were actually used. Rights of a Suspect During a Police Investigation A police investigation is not a procedural formality. It is a decisive stage that often determines whether a case proceeds to indictment and how subsequent criminal proceedings unfold. A suspect is guaranteed the right to remain silent under the Constitution and the Criminal Procedure Act. There is no obligation to answer every question, particularly where the facts are unclear or where an answer may be unfavorable. Investigative authorities are legally required to inform suspects of this right. In addition, a suspect has the right to assistance of counsel (Article 243-2(1) of the Criminal Procedure Act). A defense attorney may assist from the pre-investigation stage, organize the direction of statements, attend police questioning, and intervene where questioning becomes improper or coercive. In cryptocurrency-related cases—where transaction structures, wallet movements, and technical elements are complex—the involvement of counsel during questioning often plays a decisive role. Where arrest or detention occurs, the suspect may request judicial review of its legality. Overnight interrogations and excessively long questioning sessions are strictly restricted by law. Preparing for a Cryptocurrency Fraud Police Investigation The most important step prior to appearing for questioning is a systematic organization of the facts. Key materials may include: Cryptocurrency transaction histories, Investment agreements or offering documents, Communication records with investors, and Documentation tracing the flow and use of funds. Consistency in statements is critical. Providing spontaneous answers while memories are unclear may result in inconsistencies that later work against the suspect during prosecution or trial. Because written interrogation records are frequently treated as key evidence in court, any inaccuracies must be corrected immediately at the investigation stage. If investigators attempt to induce unfavorable statements or apply undue pressure, the suspect should exercise the right to remain silent and seek immediate assistance from counsel. Defense Strategy in Cryptocurrency Investment Fraud Cases Defense in cryptocurrency investment fraud cases must be based on structure and evidence, not emotion or unsubstantiated assertions. First, it is essential to demonstrate that actual investments were executed and that there was a genuine possibility of profit. This directly undermines allegations of deceptive conduct. Second, evidence showing the absence of intent to misappropriate funds—such as partial profit distributions, operating expenses, or documented investment use—serves as a key factor in rebutting criminal intent. Third, emphasizing the inherent volatility of cryptocurrency markets helps clarify that losses resulted from market risk rather than fraudulent conduct, reinforcing that the matter concerns civil liability rather than criminal responsibility. The Supreme Court has consistently held that the mere failure to return investment funds does not, by itself, establish criminal fraud. Why Early Legal Involvement Matters Once a police investigation begins on suspicion of cryptocurrency investment fraud, the criminal process is already underway. At this stage, early legal judgment and strategic involvement often determine whether a case proceeds to prosecution or concludes at the investigative level. Decent Law Firm’s Digital Asset Practice Team designs defense strategies that go beyond abstract legal theory, taking into account investigative structure, fund flow analysis, and the technical characteristics of digital assets. If you have received a police summons, it is critical to consult with legal counsel before appearing for questioning. In cryptocurrency investment fraud cases, the investigation stage often determines the final outcome.
-
How to File a Criminal Complaint for Workplace Harassment and Manage Legal Risks
Workplace Harassment: When Does It Escalate to Criminal Charges? Workplace harassment, in and of itself, is not subject to criminal punishment. However, if the conduct constituting harassment also satisfies the elements of crimes under the Criminal Act—such as assault, intimidation, insult, or defamation—criminal charges may be filed (Criminal Act Articles 260, 307, and 311). Many cases are resolved through internal reporting procedures, investigations, and personnel measures within the company. The issue arises when internal procedures fail to function effectively, or when the reporting itself results in retaliation. Where a superior in a position of dominance repeatedly engages in verbal abuse, publicly humiliates an employee, or where exclusion and isolation persist over an extended period, the matter goes beyond a mere internal workplace conflict. If psychological harm accumulates to the point that daily life or continued employment becomes difficult, and the harassment conduct satisfies the elements of a criminal offense, criminal prosecution may be considered. In such cases, civil claims for damages may also be pursued (Supreme Court Decision, November 25, 2021, Case No. 2020Da270503). The point at which one considers how to file criminal charges for workplace harassment should not be when emotions erupt, but when it is possible to calmly assess whether the objective legal requirements are met. For those enduring anxiety and fear alone, this article aims to clarify that there is a clearly defined area in which the law can provide protection. Types of Workplace Harassment That May Lead to Criminal Charges In practice, workplace harassment cases that escalate to criminal complaints tend to follow identifiable patterns. If repeated verbal abuse constitutes the offense of insult (Criminal Act Article 311), or if facts—true or false—are publicly alleged in a manner that damages another’s reputation (Criminal Act Article 307), criminal charges may be sufficiently supported. By contrast, private errands unrelated to work or excessive workloads may not, by themselves, meet the threshold for criminal punishment. However, if such conduct is accompanied by assault or threats, offenses such as coercion (Criminal Act Article 324) may be examined. Deliberately excluding an individual from meetings or work-related communications, or publicly labeling someone as a “problem employee” in front of others, also constitutes a serious matter. In particular, if retaliatory actions—such as disadvantages in personnel decisions, downgraded evaluations, or involuntary transfers—follow after harassment is reported, the legal gravity of the case increases significantly. Workplace harassment does not require repetition as an absolute condition. Even a single act may be recognized if it constitutes a serious infringement of personal dignity. Nevertheless, for criminal prosecution, each offense must satisfy its specific statutory elements. In cases of insult or defamation, requirements such as publicity and factual allegations must be met (Criminal Act Articles 307 and 311). Criminal Complaint Procedure and Key Pre-Filing Considerations In workplace harassment cases, accuracy in preparation and sequencing matters more than the procedure itself. The overall process typically proceeds as follows: Collection of Evidence and Organization of Facts Secure objective materials such as recordings, messenger conversations, emails, internal notices, and witness statements. Organize the incidents chronologically by date, location, and conduct. Review of Internal Reporting Options Under Article 76-3 of the Labor Standards Act, employees may report workplace harassment to the employer, who is obligated to investigate and take appropriate measures. Internal reporting is a legal right, and retaliatory treatment against the reporter is prohibited. Filing a Criminal Complaint with the Competent Investigative Authority The complaint should be drafted around the elements of applicable criminal offenses (e.g., assault, threats, insult, defamation), while also describing the broader context of workplace harassment. Investigation of the Complainant, Witnesses, and the Accused Consistency and precision in statements during interviews with investigators are critical points of evaluation. Review of Disposition and Consideration of Follow-Up Measures Depending on the outcome of the investigation, additional complaints, civil damages claims, or parallel labor law procedures may be considered. Emotional expressions or exaggerated descriptions during this process can undermine credibility. Moreover, if a complaint is dismissed, filing a complaint without an objective factual basis may expose the complainant to risks of defamation claims or counter-charges. Deciding how to file criminal charges for workplace harassment is never a matter to be taken lightly. A poorly prepared complaint can lead to further legal disputes, and this risk must be clearly understood. How Decent Law Firm Provides Assistance Decent Law Firm approaches workplace harassment cases not as emotional conflicts, but as matters of legal structure. We conduct advance reviews of whether criminal complaint requirements are met and design feasible strategies based on the quality and arrangement of evidence. We also work in collaboration with labor law specialists who are former certified labor attorneys, refining expressions that could be interpreted unfavorably during statements, and responding to criminal, labor, and civil issues in an integrated manner rather than treating them separately. The outcome of workplace harassment cases depends heavily on the initial response. The consequences of taking this issue lightly are far from insignificant. This is precisely why a structured response is necessary. Before it is too late, we strongly encourage discussing your available options with a qualified professional.
