We Resolve Legal Matters
How can we assist you?
Blogs
More-
Key Strategies That Can Determine the Outcome of a Traffic Accident Criminal Settlement
Criminal Risks Faced by the At-Fault Driver After a Traffic Accident Immediately after an accident, many at-fault drivers experience confusion when they are contacted by investigative authorities, even after having completed insurance reporting procedures. Questions commonly arise, such as: “Why is a criminal process involved if insurance has already been applied?” “Is imprisonment possible if no settlement is reached?” Not all traffic accidents lead to criminal punishment. However, criminal liability becomes an issue in cases involving fatal accidents, serious bodily injury, or accidents falling under one of the 11 statutory exceptions set forth in the proviso to Article 3(2) of the Act on Special Cases Concerning the Settlement of Traffic Accidents. Article 268 of the Criminal Act provides that a person who causes death or injury to another through occupational negligence or gross negligence may be punished by imprisonment for up to five years or a fine of up to KRW 20 million. Where an accident falls under the exceptions of Article 3(2) of the Traffic Accident Special Cases Act, or where the driver is not covered by comprehensive insurance, criminal punishment may apply, and depending on the severity of the case, the possibility of actual imprisonment cannot be ruled out. The Meaning and Role of Criminal Settlement Payments in Traffic Accidents Criminal settlement payments in traffic accident cases are not merely civil compensation for damages. In criminal proceedings, they serve as a significant sentencing factor in assessing whether meaningful victim recovery has occurred. Where a criminal settlement is reached, and where prosecution cannot be initiated against the victim’s explicit will pursuant to the main text of Article 3(2) of the Traffic Accident Special Cases Act, a decision of non-referral or dismissal due to lack of prosecutorial authority may be possible. Even in other cases, prosecutorial discretion such as suspension of indictment may be considered, and at the trial stage, the settlement may affect decisions regarding imprisonment or suspended sentences. What investigative authorities and courts focus on is not “how much was paid,” but whether the victim’s damage has been substantively remedied and how the offender has fulfilled their responsibility. Offering an excessive settlement amount does not automatically result in leniency, and a purely formal settlement is unlikely to yield meaningful mitigation. In such cases, the core issue is not the amount of money, but the legal significance of the settlement within the criminal process. Limitations of Attempting a Criminal Settlement Without Legal Representation When an at-fault driver attempts to negotiate directly with the victim, several risks arise: Failure of settlement due to emotional confrontation Statements that may adversely affect the criminal investigation Drafting settlement agreements with unclear legal validity Issues concerning the validity and potential withdrawal of a letter of non-punishment The timing of the settlement is also critically important. A settlement reached at an early investigative stage may work favorably toward non-referral or suspension of indictment. However, a settlement reached after the commencement of trial may only be partially reflected in sentencing and may have limited impact on whether imprisonment is imposed. In particular, settlements reached at the Supreme Court stage cannot be reflected in sentencing, making careful judgment regarding timing essential. Even well-intentioned attempts to resolve the matter may lead to unfavorable outcomes, demonstrating the clear limitations of handling criminal settlement matters independently. Decent Law Firm’s Approach to Criminal Settlement in Traffic Accident Cases Decent Law Firm begins by diagnosing the applicable legal provisions and criminal risks faced by the at-fault driver from the earliest stage of the case. Determination of whether a criminal settlement is necessary Tailored strategies for each stage: police, prosecution, and trial Conducting settlement negotiations through legal representation to prevent emotional conflict Settlement terms and language are thoroughly reviewed, and following settlement, procedures are systematically linked, including submission of opinions requesting non-referral or suspension of indictment and organization of sentencing materials. If criminal charges are being discussed and there is uncertainty regarding the appropriate settlement amount or method, early legal consultation is critical. Traffic accident criminal settlement payments are not about “how much to pay,” but about choosing the right response at the right time. An incorrect decision may lead to irreversible consequences, while appropriate legal assistance can change the direction of the case. If you are struggling with this issue, you do not have to handle it alone. Before it is too late, even a brief consultation with a legal professional is strongly recommended before proceeding with the case.
-
Stock Trading Chat Room Scam Victims: If You Feel Lost About What to Do First, Read This
The First Thoughts After Realizing You’ve Been Scammed by a Stock Trading Chat Room Many clients who come to our firm feel overwhelming frustration and self-blame, unable to clearly distinguish whether what happened was merely an investment loss or a case of fraud involving deception. In most cases, operators of stock trading chat rooms argue along the lines of: “I never forced anyone,” or “Investing is entirely at your own risk.” These responses often further cloud a victim’s judgment, especially after losses have already occurred, leaving them unsure where to begin. However, choosing the wrong response strategy at this stage can lead to irreversible disadvantages later in both criminal proceedings and civil recovery efforts. Where Victims Inevitably Get Stuck When Acting Alone The first major obstacle victims face when trying to respond on their own is determining whether the case qualifies as a criminal matter or is merely a civil dispute. Online searches rarely provide clear standards, and in many cases, the materials victims gather are insufficient to function as legally admissible evidence. Even when victims prepare chat screenshots, bank transfer records, or voice messages, these materials often lack evidentiary value or fail to capture the critical elements needed to prove deception. In practice, many complaints end with decisions of “no charges” or “non-indictment,” most commonly because the evidence was insufficient to establish fraudulent intent. Chat logs from group chats, Telegram messages, text messages, and audio files are often submitted without proper organization or legal context. This is precisely where stock trading chat room fraud cases reveal the clear limits of handling matters alone. How to Respond to Stock Trading Chat Room Fraud The key factors in distinguishing simple investment losses from criminal fraud include: Whether there were deceptive acts, such as false profit guarantees or fabricated success records Whether losses were intentionally concealed Whether there was a repeated, organized structure designed to induce investment Immediately after discovering the damage, the most important step is not emotional confrontation but systematic collection and organization of evidence. Materials related to the chat room must be organized chronologically with clear context, and bank deposit and withdrawal records should be arranged to clearly demonstrate the full flow of funds. At the same time, potential civil recovery measures—such as claims for damages—should be reviewed alongside criminal complaints. As time passes, evidence becomes harder to secure, and proving deception and causation becomes increasingly difficult. Early, structured response is therefore critical. Practical Strategies for Recovering Damages At Decent Law Firm, we do not stop at drafting a criminal complaint. We analyze the operational structure of the chat room, its profit model, and the flow of funds to assess whether the overall structure constitutes fraud. This includes reviewing potential accomplices and interconnected schemes. Decent Law Firm handles cases through the following approach: Analysis of the fraud structure Evidence organization and preservation Criminal defense and prosecution strategies at each investigative stage Review of realistic civil recovery options Full representation through investigation and trial From the victim’s perspective, it is essential to make a sober assessment of whether the case is realistically actionable and the extent to which recovery can be expected.
-
Must-read if you have suffered losses from a Bitcoin advisory investment scam
Why do “Bitcoin advisory” investment scams keep recurring? Recent cases reviewed through consultations show that the image of legitimacy created by the term “Bitcoin advisory” is a key factor amplifying investor losses. Terms such as advisory, consulting, and asset management simultaneously convey professionalism and an institutional feel, leading investors to place trust almost instinctively. The problem is that, when the actual structure is examined, the boundary between investment solicitation and advisory services is often virtually nonexistent. In many cases, victims are repeatedly encouraged to purchase specific coins or are instructed on precise timing for entering positions, while the provider formally inserts disclaimers stating that “the final decision rests with the investor.” In particular, when expressions such as guaranteed profits, loss compensation, or target returns by a certain date appear, these may constitute prohibited agreements for loss compensation or profit guarantees under the Capital Markets and Financial Investment Services Act (Article 55), and are highly likely to be evaluated as deceptive conduct constituting fraud. In practice, such representations serve as critical indicators when determining the establishment of fraud, and the same patterns are repeatedly observed in real cases. When to suspect fraud rather than a “simple investment failure” The point most investors struggle with is the mere fact that a loss occurred. However, not every loss amounts to fraud. That said, if the following elements are combined, the possibility of a Bitcoin advisory scam should be carefully examined: Whether there were promises of principal protection or loss compensation Whether upfront payments were required under the name of advisory fees, membership fees, or management fees Whether funds were transferred to personal wallets, overseas exchanges, or accounts under borrowed or third-party names If, in addition, the advisor avoids responsibility after losses occur, induces further deposits, or becomes unreachable, it becomes difficult to view the situation as a mere investment failure. From a legal perspective, the elements of fraud are assessed comprehensively: the existence of deceptive conduct, the victim’s mistake and disposition of property, and the occurrence of financial loss. In particular, in investment-fund fraud cases, whether the perpetrator had the intent or ability to return the principal at the time of the investment agreement is a key criterion (Supreme Court Decision, Sept. 26, 2013, 2013Do3631). Merely disclosing investment risk does not readily negate the establishment of fraud. If the invested funds were used for personal purposes rather than for actual investment, or if there was no intent or capacity to invest from the outset, fraud may be established regardless of whether risk disclosures were made (Daejeon District Court Decisions, Apr. 15, 2021, 2020Godan3110 and 2020Godan4443 (consolidated)). Key response points that must be organized immediately after Occurrence of Damage When Bitcoin advisory fraud is suspected, time is the most critical factor. First, all deposit records, message logs, wallet addresses, and TXIDs must be preserved immediately. Deleting messenger records or changing wallets significantly reduces the possibility of recovery. Extra caution is required if there are requests for additional transfers or for signing settlement agreements or written undertakings. Such actions may instead become evidence favorable to the perpetrator. Criminal complaints and civil claims for damages are separate procedures and can be pursued in parallel. However, the realistic possibility of recovery varies depending on factors such as whether the perpetrator can be identified, whether their assets can be traced, and whether liability can also be imposed on accomplices or platform operators. These elements must be considered collectively when formulating a response strategy. Early judgment determines later outcomes. For victims who are left alone to worry and feel anxious during this process, it is essential to clearly recognize that the choices made now will determine the feasibility of future recovery. Why legal assistance is necessary in Bitcoin advisory investment fraud cases In response, Decent Law Office first reconstructs the structure of the case in detail to determine whether it legally constitutes fraud. Under the label of “advisory services,” the firm analyzes what actions actually took place, and to what extent investment solicitation and management intervention occurred—based on contracts, messenger records, and fund flows. The firm also examines, from a legal standpoint, whether disclaimer clauses formally inserted into advisory agreements or terms of service can genuinely exempt liability. In many cases, the issue is not the existence of documents, but whether those documents truly reflect the actual transaction structure. Decent therefore focuses on clearly delineating liability based on substance rather than form. Additionally, during the investigative stage, the firm reviews the traceability of fund flows to assess the possibility of identifying perpetrators, the existence of accomplices, and the involvement of platforms or intermediaries. These cases require more than simply filing a complaint; the core objective is to establish a response strategy that keeps actual asset recovery in view. In Bitcoin advisory cases, the later the initial response, the more difficult it becomes to secure evidence and trace responsibility. Before it is too late, seek professional assistance to accurately identify the nature of the case and set the correct course of action.
-
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.
-
Mandatory 'AI Content Labeling System' Starting 2026: An Essential Guide for Businesses and Marketers
With the rapid advancement of AI technology, marketing strategies utilizing virtual humans or AI-generated content have become commonplace. In response, to prevent consumer confusion and establish a sound market order, the government is set to fully implement the ‘AI Content Labeling System’ starting January 2026. This column summarizes the key aspects of the AI Labeling System—including its background, legal basis, practical labeling methods, and risks of non-compliance—that corporate marketing managers and influencers must be aware of. 1. Background: Preventing Misinformation and Market Disruption The primary reason for enforcing the AI Labeling System as a legal obligation is the surge in false and exaggerated advertisements exploiting AI technology. The "Fake Expert" Problem: There has been an increase in cases where fake doctors or experts created via deepfake technology recommend unverified products, hindering consumers' rational choices and causing financial damage. Establishing Market Order: The government has defined these practices not merely as marketing but as "acts disturbing market order." Consequently, it has mandated the disclosure of AI generation (e.g., "This content was created by AI") to ensure consumers can clearly identify the authenticity of information. 2. Legal Basis and Key Provisions The AI Labeling System is not a simple recommendation but a strong legal obligation based on the following laws: Category Key Provisions Note Framework Act on AI Effective Jan 22, 2026. Mandates labeling and notice for high-impact and generative AI services. Administrative Fines IT Network Act Requires uploaders to label AI content and imposes management/notice responsibilities on platforms. Amendment targeted for Q1 2026 Labeling & Advertising Act Regards concealing or exaggerating AI use as Unfair Labeling/Advertising. Punitive Damages In particular, the Fair Trade Commission (FTC) plans to strictly sanction AI Washing—the act of concealing the use of AI to make content appear human-created—viewing it as deceptive advertising. 3. Practical Guide: Who, What, and How to Label 1) Obligated Parties: AI Business Operators Under the law, the obligated parties are defined as "AI Business Operators." This encompasses not only AI technology developers but all business entities (corporations, organizations, and individuals) that provide products or services utilizing AI. 2) Content Subject to Labeling Generative AI Products/Services: Prior notice is mandatory when providing AI-based services such as chatbots or image generation tools. Deepfake Results: Virtual audio, images, or videos that are difficult to distinguish from reality. Advertising Content: AI-generated content for commercial purposes, such as shopping mall detail pages and influencer sponsored ads. 3) Labeling Methods and Exceptions General Principle: Must be labeled in a way that consumers can clearly recognize (e.g., subtitles, watermarks, etc.). Cultural/Artistic Exception: However, if the content qualifies as a "artistic or creative expression" and labeling would significantly hinder appreciation, flexible labeling exceptions may apply (Article 31, Paragraph 3 of the Framework Act on AI). 4. Penalties and Risks (Fines vs. Damages) Sanctions for violating the AI labeling duty are divided into administrative sanctions (fines) and civil liability (damages). ① Violation of the Framework Act on AI: Administrative Fines If an AI business operator fails to comply with the labeling duty or fails to notify the production of deepfakes, they will receive a corrective order from the Minister of Science and ICT. Failure to comply may result in an administrative fine of up to 30 million KRW. ② Violation of the Labeling & Advertising Act: Punitive Damages Beyond simple failure to label, if the act involves malicious false or exaggerated advertising (e.g., using fake experts), the Fair Labeling and Advertising Act applies. Current: Liability for damages up to 3 times the amount of damage. Proposed Amendment: The government is pushing for an amendment to increase this limit to up to 5 times to eradicate market disturbance. 5. Conclusion and Response The AI Labeling System is not a regulation saying "Do not use AI," but rather a standard of trust requiring "Transparency if AI is used." With the January 2026 implementation approaching, companies must review their internal compliance processes to prevent unnecessary legal disputes. The Corporate Law Team at Decent Law Firm provides professional assistance regarding AI and IT-related legal advisory and compliance system construction. Please feel free to contact us if you have any inquiries.
-
If Recovering Losses from a Copy Trading Scam Is Urgent
1. How Copy Trading Scams Typically Begin Copy trading scams often start by gaining investors’ trust through phrases such as automated trading, professional management, or profit mirroring. Statements like “you don’t need to trade yourself” or “just follow a verified account” appear to reduce the burden of investment decisions. In fact, small profits may be generated in the early stages, making the scheme seem like a legitimate investment. However, after a certain period, a recurring pattern of inducing additional deposits begins. As the invested amount increases, withdrawals are delayed. Investors are asked to prepay fees or accept changing conditions, followed by loss of contact or restricted account access—at which point the damage becomes final. Unlike a simple investment loss, cases suspected to involve copy trading scams hinge on whether there was an intent to deceive investors and unlawfully obtain financial gain. Because this determination is made by comprehensively examining the transaction structure, fund management practices, and the operator’s conduct, becoming a victim without having the opportunity to explain one’s position is far from uncommon. 2. The Core Structure That Makes It Look Like a Legitimate Investment Copy trading scams are often highly sophisticated in appearance. They are designed to resemble lawful investment services through real-time trading screens, screenshots of profit verification, and performance graphs. Some even use interfaces similar to actual exchanges to eliminate suspicion. However, there is a clear gap between the structure perceived by the investor and the way the system is actually operated. Whether this discrepancy constitutes a violation of the duty to disclose material information or amounts to deceptive conduct depends on the specific facts of each case. If there is a material inconsistency between how the investment structure was explained and how it was actually operated—and that inconsistency influenced the investor’s decision—it may serve as a key basis for establishing fraud. 3. The Three Questions Victims Ask Most Frequently Q1. Can it still be considered fraud even if I actually made profits? Yes. Initial profit payouts are often used to build trust and induce additional deposits. The key issue is not whether profits occurred, but how those profits were generated. Q2. The account was in my name—can this still be considered fraud? What matters more than the account holder’s name is who actually controlled the trades and the funds. If the operator effectively controlled the transactions, it may be difficult to view the activity as a normal investment. Q3. When should I consider legal action if withdrawals are blocked? Once withdrawal conditions are repeatedly changed or additional payments are demanded, delaying a response is risky. If this is accompanied by avoidance of contact or account restrictions, immediate legal assessment is required. 4. How Decent Law Firm Provides Assistance Decent Law Firm does not treat copy trading scam cases as mere investment disputes. From the earliest stage, we focus not only on individual losses, but on the overall transaction structure and fund flows. We organize legal issues based on the substance of the investment method, the operator’s level of involvement, and indicators of fund control. Based on this analysis, we assess the feasibility of criminal complaints and investigation responses, while also considering parallel recovery measures such as civil damages claims or restitution of unjust enrichment. In copy trading scam cases, outcomes vary significantly depending on the initial response. Drawing on extensive experience with virtual asset and automated trading matters, we provide clear, practice-oriented strategies that reflect the key points investigators focus on. Accurately identifying the structure is what ultimately determines the direction of the case.
