We Resolve Legal Matters
How can we assist you?
Blogs
More-
When Does Crypto Trading Violate Korea's Specified Financial Transaction Information Act? Standards and Penalties Explained
Trading virtual assets frequently, or trading large amounts, does not by itself mean that someone has violated Korea's Specified Financial Transaction Information Act (특금법). What matters most is whether a person carried out virtual asset buying, selling, exchanging, transferring, storing, or brokering as a business for other people — and whether that person, as a Virtual Asset Service Provider (VASP), failed to file the required report with Korea's Financial Intelligence Unit (FIU). The Supreme Court of Korea has held that whether someone qualifies as a VASP must be judged comprehensively, taking into account the purpose and type of the transactions, their scale and frequency, the period and method of trading, and other relevant circumstances. Table of Contents What Is a Violation of the Specified Financial Transaction Information Act? Which Types of Violations Arise in Virtual Asset Trading? How Is Personal Coin Trading Distinguished From Operating a Virtual Asset Business? Can OTC, P2P, or USDT Trading Also Violate the Act? What Are the Penalties for Violating the Act? What Should You Check If You Are Being Investigated for a Suspected Violation? Frequently Asked Questions Summary and Points to Note 1. What Is a Violation of the Specified Financial Transaction Information Act? A violation of the Act refers to a breach of the reporting, notification, or customer due diligence obligations set out in the Act on Reporting and Using Specified Financial Transaction Information (특정 금융거래정보의 보고 및 이용 등에 관한 법률). The Act imposes certain obligations on financial companies and Virtual Asset Service Providers (VASPs) in order to prevent money laundering and the financing of illegal activities. In the virtual asset sector, the issue that most commonly arises for individuals and unregistered operators is operating a virtual asset trading business — while qualifying as a VASP — without filing the required report with the FIU. Accordingly, what matters is not simply the fact that coins were traded, but rather for whose benefit and through what structure the trading was carried out, and whether it was conducted continuously and repeatedly as a business. [Related Legislation] Act on Reporting and Using Specified Financial Transaction Information — Korea Law Information Center 2. Which Types of Violations Arise in Virtual Asset Trading? In the virtual asset sector, issues can arise not only from operating without registration, but also from failing to file required notifications or changes of registration, and from breaching anti-money laundering obligations. These can generally be divided into the following categories. Unregistered virtual asset business This refers to operating a virtual asset trading business — while qualifying as a VASP — without filing the required report with the FIU. Depending on the actual structure of the trades, even individual-to-individual OTC or P2P transactions may be found to constitute an unregistered virtual asset business. Failure to file required notifications or changes of registration Even a VASP that has already filed a report must file a notification of change, following the procedure set out in the Act, whenever the details of its original filing change. In particular, from August 20, 2026, the amended Act and its subordinate regulations take effect, tightening VASP registration requirements. Under the amended system, the scope of screening expands to cover the legal violation history, financial status, and social credibility of controlling shareholders, and a VASP's organizational structure, personnel, IT systems, and internal control system also become substantive elements of the registration review. In addition, notifications relating to controlling shareholders and the compliance system will shift from after-the-fact filing within 14 days of the change to advance filing 30 days before the change takes place. If a matter subject to advance filing is carried out before it has been accepted by the authorities, criminal penalties or administrative sanctions may follow — so VASPs planning changes to their governance structure or compliance system should check the filing timeline well in advance. [Related Source] Financial Services Commission & Korea Financial Intelligence Unit, "Comprehensive Revision of the VASP Registration Manual in Line With Strengthened VASP Registration Requirements" (Aug. 13, 2026) 3. How Is Personal Coin Trading Distinguished From Operating a Virtual Asset Business? Whether someone qualifies as a VASP is not determined by transaction amount or frequency alone. The Supreme Court has held that the following factors must be considered together: The purpose and type of the transactions The scale and frequency of the transactions The period over which the trading continued The specific method of trading Whether the trading was carried out for another person's benefit Whether consideration was received for the trading The Court found that an ordinary user who buys, sells, or exchanges virtual assets on an exchange solely for their own benefit and on their own account is, absent special circumstances, unlikely to be treated as a VASP. On the other hand, a person who continuously and repeatedly trades virtual assets for an indefinite number of customers or users, and receives consideration for doing so, may in principle qualify as a VASP. Criteria for distinguishing personal trading from a virtual asset business Category Personal Virtual Asset Trading Trading Likely to Be Treated as a Virtual Asset Business Purpose of trading Personal investment or asset management Providing trading convenience to another person Counterparty Self-directed trading through an exchange Customers or an indefinite number of users Source of funds Mainly the trader's own funds Involvement of customer or third-party funds Profit Capital gains from investment Fees, spreads, or other trading consideration Method of trading Based on the trader's own judgment At another party's request Continuity Depends on investment circumstances Continuous and repeated in a set manner A large trading volume does not, on its own, make trading a virtual asset business if it was conducted with the trader's own funds. Conversely, even a relatively small trading volume may require a review of VASP registration obligations, if the trader repeatedly bought and sold coins at the request of multiple people and received consideration for doing so. [Related Case Law] Supreme Court, Judgment of Dec. 12, 2024, Case No. 2024Do10710 4. Can OTC, P2P, or USDT Trading Also Violate the Act? Trading virtual assets through OTC or P2P methods does not, by itself, make the trading illegal. What matters is the actual structure of the transactions. If a person purchases USDT with their own funds and trades it on their own account, this is likely closer to ordinary investment activity. On the other hand, the following types of trading warrant a review of whether they constitute an unregistered virtual asset business: Repeatedly buying and selling USDT or other assets at the request of multiple people Receiving Korean won and sending the corresponding virtual asset to the other party's wallet Continuing to trade while receiving fees or spreads Brokering or carrying out another person's virtual asset trading, exchange, or transfer on their behalf Accordingly, what matters is not simply the trading volume, but whose funds were used, how the counterparties were found, and what consideration was received. 5. What Are the Penalties for Violating the Act? The severity of the penalty depends on which reporting obligation was breached. Criminal penalties for violations of the Act Type of Violation Penalty Operating a virtual asset business without filing a report with the FIU Imprisonment for up to 5 years, or a fine of up to KRW 50 million Filing a report through false or fraudulent means and operating a business Imprisonment for up to 5 years, or a fine of up to KRW 50 million Failing to file a required notification of change Imprisonment for up to 3 years, or a fine of up to KRW 30 million Filing a notification of change through false or fraudulent means Imprisonment for up to 3 years, or a fine of up to KRW 30 million These statutory penalty ranges remain unchanged under the amended Act, which takes effect on August 20, 2026. That said, actual cases also take into account the period and scale of trading, the profit obtained, and each party's role and degree of involvement. Depending on the trading method used, it is also necessary to separately review whether charges such as violation of the Foreign Exchange Transactions Act, fraud, or offenses related to proceeds of crime may also apply. 6. What Should You Check If You Are Being Investigated for a Suspected Violation? The first step is to organize all trading activity into transactions made for your own investment and transactions made on behalf of others. A large volume of account deposits and withdrawals or virtual asset transactions does not, on its own, reveal the true nature of the trading. Before an investigation, it is worth reviewing the following materials: Trading and transfer records from exchanges and personal wallets Deposit and withdrawal records for accounts used in the trading KakaoTalk, Telegram, or other messages exchanged with counterparties The actual profit structure, such as fees or spreads received How each counterparty was found, and the role each participant played In particular, if funds were repeatedly received in Korean won from multiple people and virtual assets were sent in return, it is essential to first trace the flow of funds and determine which deposit corresponds to which virtual asset transaction. Based on this, you should be able to explain whether you were an investor trading on your own account, or someone who continuously and repeatedly carried out virtual asset trading on behalf of others. 7. Frequently Asked Questions Q1. Does trading coins frequently automatically mean I have violated the Act? Frequent trading alone does not constitute a violation. If the trading was carried out for your own benefit and on your own account, it may qualify as ordinary virtual asset investment. However, if you repeatedly traded at another person's request and received consideration for doing so, this requires separate review. Q2. If I buy USDT low and sell it high, do I need to file a report? Earning a profit from the price difference alone does not make someone a VASP. The determination depends on whether the profit came from personal investment, or from repeatedly supplying USDT to customers while receiving fees or spreads. Q3. Is it a problem if I bought coins on behalf of an acquaintance as a favor? A one-off favor and continuous, repeated conduct of this kind must be distinguished. Relevant factors include the number and period of the transactions, whether consideration was received, and how far the range of counterparties expanded. 8. Summary and Points to Note Whether a violation of the Act has occurred is not determined by the amount or frequency of virtual asset trading alone. The key factor in distinguishing personal investment from an unregistered virtual asset business is whose funds were used, for whose benefit the trading was carried out, and what consideration was received. In addition, from August 20, 2026, the registration review and certain notification-of-change procedures for VASPs will be strengthened, so existing operators should also confirm the requirements and filing deadlines under the revised registration manual. Decent Law Firm reviews VASP status, violation risk under the Act, and investigation response strategy based on the structure of virtual asset transactions and the flow of funds involved.
-
Unregistered Virtual Asset Service Providers in Korea: Registration Requirements and Penalties
Frequent trading of virtual assets does not, by itself, mean that you are required to register as a Virtual Asset Service Provider (VASP) in Korea. However, if you repeatedly buy, sell, exchange, transfer, broker, arrange, or facilitate virtual asset transactions for others and receive compensation for doing so, you may be considered a VASP subject to registration requirements under Korea’s Act on Reporting and Using Specified Financial Transaction Information (the “Specified Financial Information Act”). 1. What Is an Unregistered Virtual Asset Service Provider in Korea? A person or entity may be treated as an unregistered VASP if it conducts regulated virtual asset activities as a business without completing the required registration with the Korea Financial Intelligence Unit (KoFIU). The Specified Financial Information Act regulates businesses engaged in activities involving virtual assets, including the purchase and sale of virtual assets, exchanges between virtual assets, certain transfers, custody or management, and the brokerage, arrangement, or agency of virtual asset transactions. Accordingly, the rules are not limited to large centralized exchanges. Depending on the actual structure of the business, an individual or smaller operator may also fall within the scope of a VASP. Specified Financial Information Act, Article 7 ↗ 2. How Is VASP Status Determined? The key issue is not simply whether virtual assets were traded, but whether the relevant activities were carried out “as a business.” The Supreme Court of Korea has held that VASP status should be determined by considering the circumstances as a whole, including: the purpose and type of the transactions; the scale and frequency of the transactions; the period over which the transactions were conducted; and the manner in which the transactions were carried out. In particular, an ordinary exchange user who repeatedly buys or exchanges virtual assets solely for his or her own account and benefit will generally not be regarded as a VASP, absent special circumstances. By contrast, a person who repeatedly conducts virtual asset transactions for the benefit of an unspecified number of customers or users and receives compensation in return may, in principle, be regarded as a VASP. Supreme Court Decision 2024Do10710, Dec. 12, 2024 ↗ 3. How Are Personal Crypto Trading and VASP Activities Distinguished? The amount or frequency of trading is not the decisive factor. What matters more is for whom the transactions are conducted and how the business operates. Factor More Likely to Be Personal Trading May Require VASP Review Purpose Personal investment or profit Providing transaction services to customers Funds Trader’s own funds Funds connected to customers or third parties Counterparty Trading through an exchange for one’s own account Transactions involving multiple customers Compensation No separate fee Fees, spreads, or other compensation received Transaction method Trading based on one’s own decisions Buying, selling, exchanging, or transferring at a customer’s request Continuity Trading as part of personal investment activity Activities performed repeatedly as a business A high transaction volume or a large number of trades does not automatically make a person an unregistered VASP. Conversely, even if transactions are conducted through a personal bank account or wallet, VASP status may need to be reviewed where the person repeatedly provides transaction services to customers and earns fees or other compensation. 4. Can OTC, P2P, or Crypto Transaction Services Require VASP Registration? Yes. OTC or P2P transactions are not automatically subject to VASP registration, but the actual business model may fall within the regulated scope. For example, VASP issues may arise where an operator repeatedly: receives Korean won from customers and transfers USDT or other virtual assets in return; buys, sells, or exchanges virtual assets at a customer’s request; earns fees or profits through transaction spreads; or solicits customers through Telegram, open chat rooms, or similar online channels. The absence of a formal exchange platform or physical business location does not, by itself, exclude the activity from VASP regulation. In June 2026, KoFIU specifically identified private exchange operators that buy and sell stablecoins and other virtual assets in exchange for fiat currency as a type of unregistered virtual asset business activity requiring regulatory attention. KoFIU / Financial Services Commission – Official Source ↗ 5. Can an Overseas Virtual Asset Business Be Required to Register in Korea? Yes. An overseas business may be subject to Korean VASP registration requirements if it conducts business activities targeting users in Korea. KoFIU considers various factors when assessing whether an overseas virtual asset business is conducting business in Korea, including: whether a Korean-language website or service is provided; whether payments in Korean won are supported; whether customer acquisition campaigns target Korean users; and whether marketing activities are directed at users in Korea. In June 2026, KoFIU announced that it had identified eight illegal OTC operators and four overseas exchanges conducting business in Korea, referred the cases to the police, and requested domestic access restrictions for the relevant websites and applications. Accordingly, the fact that a company is incorporated or headquartered outside Korea does not, by itself, exempt it from Korean VASP regulations. KoFIU / Financial Services Commission – Official Source ↗ 6. What Are the Consequences of Operating as an Unregistered VASP? Operating a virtual asset business without the required registration may result in criminal liability under the Specified Financial Information Act. Under Article 17(1) of the Act, a person who conducts virtual asset transactions as a business without filing the registration required under Article 7(1) may be subject to imprisonment for up to five years or a fine of up to KRW 50 million. Specified Financial Information Act, Article 17(1) ↗ In addition, amendments to the Specified Financial Information Act scheduled to take effect on August 20, 2026 will strengthen the entry and registration requirements applicable to VASPs. The amended framework expands the review of matters such as the financial condition and social credibility of the VASP and its major shareholders, as well as organizational, personnel, IT infrastructure, and internal control requirements. Financial Services Commission – Official Source ↗ KoFIU has also taken measures against unregistered operators, including referrals to investigative authorities, requests to restrict domestic access to websites and mobile applications, and restrictions involving transactions with registered VASPs. KoFIU / Financial Services Commission – Official Source ↗ If you have already conducted transactions that may fall within the scope of VASP activities, it is advisable to organize the relevant transaction records, bank account and wallet flows, communications with customers, fee or spread structures, and the specific role you performed before assessing the applicable regulatory and legal risks. 7. Frequently Asked Questions (FAQ) Q1. If I frequently buy and sell USDT, am I automatically considered a VASP? No. Frequent trading alone does not automatically make you a VASP. It is necessary to consider whether you were trading with your own funds for your own benefit or conducting transactions for customers in return for fees or other compensation. Q2. Do I need to register if I occasionally buy crypto on behalf of a friend? Not necessarily. An isolated transaction performed at the request of a friend does not, by itself, determine VASP status. The analysis may change depending on factors such as the number and range of counterparties, transaction frequency and duration, whether compensation was received, and whether the activity was carried out continuously or repeatedly. Q3. Am I outside the VASP rules if I do not have a registered business? No. The absence of a Korean business registration does not, by itself, determine whether you are a VASP under the Specified Financial Information Act. Even an individual operating through a personal account or wallet may need to consider VASP registration requirements if the person repeatedly provides virtual asset-related services to customers for profit. 8. Key Takeaways Whether a person or business constitutes an unregistered VASP in Korea depends not simply on the volume of crypto trading, but primarily on whether virtual asset-related services are repeatedly provided to customers as a business. For OTC, P2P, or transaction-facilitation arrangements in particular, the purpose of the transactions, counterparties, flow of funds, fee structure, and the operator’s actual role should be reviewed together. Decent Law Firm advises clients on whether their virtual asset business models fall within Korea’s VASP regulatory framework, including registration requirements under the Specified Financial Information Act and legal risks associated with unregistered operations.
-
2026 AML Reform in Korea: 3 Key Anti-Money Laundering Obligations Under the Revised FSCMA
The amended Korean Anti-Money Laundering law is no longer just a compliance issue for banks. It is rapidly becoming a core operational and governance issue for virtual asset businesses, fintech companies, and even certain professional service providers. The revised Act on Reporting and Using Specified Financial Transaction Information (commonly referred to as Korea’s AML law or “Special Financial Transactions Act”) was promulgated on February 19, 2026, and is scheduled to take effect on August 20, 2026. The amendments significantly strengthen AML obligations for Virtual Asset Service Providers (VASPs) and expand the overall compliance framework surrounding crypto-related transactions in Korea. This article outlines the three most important AML changes businesses should understand before the new rules take effect. What Is Korea’s “Special Financial Transactions Act” (특금법)? Korea’s AML framework is governed by the Act on Reporting and Using Specified Financial Transaction Information, which establishes reporting, monitoring, and internal control obligations designed to prevent: Money laundering Terrorist financing Illicit use of financial systems Under this framework, financial institutions and VASPs must identify suspicious transactions, verify customer information, maintain records, and implement internal AML controls. In practical terms, the law is designed to prevent criminal proceeds from entering or moving through the Korean financial system. 1. Stronger KYC and Transaction Monitoring Requirements The first major change is the expansion of customer due diligence and risk-based monitoring obligations. Under the revised rules, financial institutions and VASPs will be expected to verify not only customer identity, but also: Source of funds Purpose of transactions Beneficial ownership (BO) Ongoing transaction behavior and risk profile Electronic KYC (e-KYC), non-face-to-face identity verification, and real-time suspicious transaction detection systems are becoming effectively mandatory operational standards. The revised framework also strengthens the Risk-Based Approach (RBA) and Enhanced Due Diligence (EDD) requirements for high-risk customers and transactions. In other words, AML compliance in Korea is moving away from a simple “ID verification” model toward a continuous risk management model. For crypto exchanges and fintech operators, this means AML systems must function as active monitoring infrastructure rather than passive onboarding procedures. 2. Expanded Reporting Obligations and Stronger Travel Rule Enforcement The second major reform focuses directly on virtual asset transactions. Stricter Entry Requirements for VASPs Korean regulators are strengthening licensing and registration standards for virtual asset businesses. Proposed measures include enhanced screening of: Major shareholders Executives and management personnel Financial soundness and governance structures The regulatory approach increasingly resembles traditional financial institution supervision. Expanded Suspicious Transaction Reporting (STR) Proposed amendments to the enforcement decree and supervisory regulations would effectively require mandatory suspicious transaction reporting (STR) for certain virtual asset transactions exceeding KRW 10 million. The final regulations are expected to be confirmed around July 2026. Expansion of the Travel Rule Korea is also moving toward broader implementation of the Travel Rule. The proposed changes would: Expand sender/recipient information transmission requirements Increase the scope of covered transactions Impose additional verification obligations on receiving VASPs For VASPs operating in Korea, AML obligations are no longer limited to registration requirements. They are becoming a central factor affecting operational design, transaction processing, onboarding policies, and even fee structures. 3. Broader AML Accountability and Expansion to Professional Service Providers The third major reform concerns governance, accountability, and expansion of regulated entities. AML Officers Elevated to Executive-Level Responsibility Korean regulators are pushing to formalize AML reporting officers as executive-level positions. This means boards of directors and senior management will be expected to assume direct responsibility for AML governance and oversight. AML compliance is increasingly treated as a corporate governance issue rather than merely an internal compliance function. Formalization of AML Compliance Evaluations The amendments would also codify AML system evaluations into law. Participation in regulatory AML assessments may become mandatory, and penalties are expected for: Refusing to submit materials Providing false information Obstructing regulatory reviews Expansion to DNFBPs Korea is also formally considering AML obligations for Designated Non-Financial Businesses and Professions (DNFBPs), including: Lawyers Accountants Tax advisors The government has indicated that further amendments aligned with FATF standards are under discussion for 2026. This signals a broader regulatory trend: AML obligations are expanding beyond banks and crypto exchanges into the wider professional services ecosystem. What Should Companies Prepare Before August 20, 2026? With the revised law taking effect on August 20, 2026, companies have limited time to review and upgrade their AML frameworks. Financial institutions, fintech operators, and VASPs should now assess: Internal AML policies and procedures KYC and monitoring systems Transaction screening capabilities Governance and reporting structures Travel Rule compliance processes Risk-based customer classification systems For many businesses, the real legal risk will not come from the existence of AML obligations themselves, but from failing to implement operational systems that regulators consider “effective” in practice. If your company is preparing for Korean AML compliance, virtual asset regulation, or VASP-related legal risk management, the Virtual Asset Team at Decent Law Firm can assist with regulatory analysis, compliance structuring, and AML framework reviews.
-
Front-Running in Korean Stocks: Where Does It Become Illegal? (A Complete Guide for Foreign Investors, Listed Company Executives, and Finance Professionals in Korea)
If you've been investing in Korean stocks, or working in Korea's financial industry, you've probably heard the term "front-running" (선행매매) come up more and more lately. It's not just an issue for stock YouTubers or chat-room operators. Listed company executives, fund managers, analysts, and even ordinary retail investors can find themselves caught up in it — whether as victims or, in some cases, unwitting participants. The Financial Supervisory Service (FSS) recently identified illegal activity across five YouTube channels and announced it would refer cases to prosecutors. The message is clear: the era of looking the other way is over. Here's what you need to know. 1. What Is Front-Running, Exactly? Front-running means trading on information that isn't yet public — getting in before everyone else does, and profiting when the news breaks. In the Korean market, it typically shows up in three ways. The first is the stock influencer model. A YouTuber or paid trading-room operator quietly buys shares in a stock, then recommends it publicly to subscribers. Once the price jumps, they sell. Subscribers who bought on the recommendation are left holding losses. The second is the corporate insider model. An executive or employee of a listed company learns about positive news — strong earnings, a major contract, an M&A deal — before it's disclosed, and buys shares in advance. Selling before bad news goes public to avoid losses falls into the same category. The third is the financial professional model. An analyst, fund manager, or trader uses advance knowledge of large institutional orders, upcoming research reports, or trading strategies to place personal trades ahead of the market. Under Korea's Financial Investment Services and Capital Markets Act (FSCMA), all three can constitute illegal use of material non-public information, market manipulation, or fraudulent trading — carrying criminal penalties, fines, and disgorgement of profits. 2. What Does "Illegal" Actually Mean Here? Regulators look at three things together: the nature of the information (was it material and non-public?), the person's relationship to that information (did they have it through their job or position?), and the timing of the trade. Critically, it doesn't matter whether the trade was ultimately profitable. Using the information to trade — full stop — is the issue. Some specific situations that have drawn enforcement action in Korea include paid subscription services where operators recommended stocks they already owned, auto-trading bots sold without the required investment discretionary license, and YouTube channels providing ongoing investment advice without registering as an investment advisory business (유사투자자문업). One thing worth noting for foreign investors: Korean regulators have been actively cooperating with overseas financial authorities. Cross-border cases are no longer treated as out of reach. 3. If You're a Retail Investor: Protect Yourself The two risks individual investors face are being victimized and, less obviously, being mistaken for a participant. Paid trading rooms (리딩방) on KakaoTalk, Telegram, or Discord can look legitimate on the surface. An operator might post screenshots showing they're "buying along with you" — but in practice, they bought earlier, at a lower price, and are waiting for your money to push the price up before they exit. Warning signs include offers to share profits if you hand over account access, hints about "tomorrow's pick" designed to get you in early, and channels that charge tiered monthly fees (anything from a few thousand won to hundreds of thousands) for stock tips. If you've suffered losses through one of these schemes, the standard path in Korea is: file a complaint with the FSS (금감원 민원), assess the viability of a civil damages claim, and if the facts support it, file a criminal complaint (고소·고발). 4. If You Work at a Listed Company or Financial Firm Front-running isn't just a personal liability issue — it becomes a corporate governance failure the moment a senior employee is involved. For listed companies, a single suspicious trade by an executive can crater market trust and share price, and regulators have been clear that internal control systems will be scrutinized alongside the individual. Strengthened disclosure rules around insider transactions mean "we dealt with it internally" is no longer a viable response. For securities firms, asset managers, and other financial institutions, the exposure is higher because information access is higher. Analysts, PMs, traders, and sales staff are structurally positioned to know things before the market does — and that's precisely why the compliance burden is heavy. One enforcement action can trigger licensing risk, reputational damage, and regulatory scrutiny across the entire firm. 5. The Minimum Your Company Should Have in Place Whether you're a small listed company or a mid-sized asset manager, the logic of "we're too small to be a target" is exactly how firms end up making headlines. On internal policy, you need a written definition of material non-public information, clear procedures for how it's handled, mandatory account disclosure and trade reporting requirements for employees and related parties, and blackout periods around disclosure events. On training and attestation, key departments — finance, strategy, IR, research, sales — should receive regular compliance training. New hires and newly promoted staff should sign attestations acknowledging their obligations. On monitoring, periodic review of employee and related-party trading patterns, and sampling of trades around disclosure events, is the baseline. On incident response, you should have a documented procedure covering internal investigation authority, communication standards for dealing with the FSS, Korea Exchange, and prosecutors, and a protocol for board and audit committee reporting. If You've Been Affected — or Want to Get Ahead of the Risk For individual investors who suspect they've been the victim of a front-running scheme, we assess the facts and advise on the realistic options across criminal, civil, and regulatory channels. For listed companies and financial firms, we offer a structured review covering internal policy gaps, employee training design, and a full incident response manual — including FSS, Korea Exchange, and prosecutorial engagement. If a suspicious trade has already been flagged internally, we can advise from the investigation stage through to external response. You don't need to have everything figured out before reaching out. A brief initial consultation is enough to get a clear picture of where the risk sits.
-
Pharmaceutical Law Violations in Korea: What Pharma Companies & Distributors Must Review Now
Why You Need to Review Compliance Now Regulatory scrutiny over pharmaceutical rebate practices in Korea is intensifying. What is notable is that enforcement is no longer limited to individual misconduct but is increasingly focused on the overall transaction structure of a company. Authorities are examining how sales, contracts, and financial flows are designed and whether those structures, in substance, incentivize prescriptions or product adoption. Pharmaceutical companies and distributors operating in Korea are subject not only to the Pharmaceutical Affairs Act, but also to the Medical Service Act, national health insurance regulations, and fair trade laws. This layered regulatory framework creates a situation where a single transaction can raise multiple legal issues at once. In this environment, superficial compliance systems or loosely implemented internal controls can become a risk factor rather than a safeguard. If internal processes appear formal but lack substance, they may be interpreted as evidence of systematic or intentional violations. As a result, companies must move beyond field-level caution and instead reassess their entire structure, including contracts, expense allocation, and internal approval systems, from a regulatory perspective. Key Risk Areas for B2B Pharmaceutical Businesses One of the most common issues arises from rebate structures tied to prescription volume or product adoption. Even when benefits are provided under the label of marketing support, education, or promotional activities, they may still be treated as illegal rebates if there is a clear connection to sales performance. Another major risk involves consulting or marketing agreements that lack substantive deliverables. Payments made as advisory fees, research funding, or academic sponsorships may be questioned if there is no meaningful output such as reports, meeting records, or measurable contributions. In such cases, authorities may view the arrangement as a disguised incentive rather than a legitimate contract. Additionally, inflated or fictitious expenses present a significant exposure. Creating artificial costs through fabricated service contracts or exaggerated advertising fees to fund rebates can lead not only to pharmaceutical law violations but also to tax-related issues. These cases often trigger broader investigations that combine regulatory enforcement with financial scrutiny. Legal and Business Consequences Violations of Korean pharmaceutical regulations can lead to both criminal liability and administrative sanctions. In serious cases, executives and employees may face imprisonment or fines, and the company itself may also be penalized under joint liability provisions. Where misconduct is repeated or structurally embedded, enforcement trends indicate that actual custodial sentences are increasingly being considered. Administrative measures can have an even more immediate impact on business operations. These may include suspension of sales, significant monetary penalties, and reimbursement or clawback actions under national health insurance rules. Beyond formal sanctions, companies often experience secondary consequences such as loss of business partners, exclusion from procurement opportunities, and deterioration in financial credibility. In practice, these combined effects can threaten the long-term viability of the business. What Must Be Reviewed Immediately At this stage, companies should first examine whether their contract and expense structures are genuinely tied to real services and outcomes. Agreements labeled as consulting, services, or academic support must be supported by clear documentation and tangible deliverables. If such arrangements are directly or indirectly linked to prescription or sales performance, they are likely to be scrutinized as potential rebate schemes. It is equally important to review internal sales processes and approval systems. Companies need to ensure that promotional expenses and support payments are approved based on clear and consistent criteria, and that the decision-making process is fully traceable. If the approval structure cannot be explained or reconstructed, the organization itself may be exposed to allegations of intentional or negligent involvement. Finally, compliance frameworks must be practical and enforceable. Basic measures such as training sessions or written acknowledgments are no longer sufficient. Effective compliance requires integrating anti-rebate principles into KPI design, incentive structures, and ongoing monitoring systems. The ability to detect irregular transactions early and correct them internally is one of the most important factors in reducing regulatory risk. The Outcome Is Often Determined Before the Investigation Begins In many cases, the outcome of pharmaceutical compliance issues in Korea is effectively determined before a formal investigation is initiated. Once authorities conduct a search or begin an inquiry, they rely heavily on existing records, including contract structures, financial flows, and documented internal decisions. At that point, it becomes extremely difficult to modify or reframe the underlying structure. For this reason, proactive review and restructuring are critical. The key question is whether the company’s current transaction framework can withstand regulatory scrutiny from an objective third-party perspective. If there is any uncertainty, it is advisable to conduct a compliance review before the risk escalates into an investigation.
-
A Legal Guide by a Pseudo-Investment Advisory Lawyer
The Decisive Difference Between Pseudo-Investment Advisory Business and Investment Advisory Business Many operators run paid “signal groups” or trading rooms on platforms such as KakaoTalk or Telegram relying solely on a pseudo-investment advisory business registration. However, in actual legal assessments, the most critical issue is individualization. A pseudo-investment advisory business provides non-personalized, general investment information to an unspecified audience through publications, broadcasts, or online postings. In contrast, an investment advisory business offers customized advice tailored to a specific individual’s investment profile, which requires formal registration with the Financial Services Commission. Following the 2024 amendment to the Capital Markets Act, structures in which operators receive compensation and directly exchange opinions with users online are increasingly likely to be classified as investment advisory services. Accordingly, responding to member questions in paid groups by specifying particular stocks or precise buy/sell timing carries a high risk of being deemed unregistered investment advisory activity, subject to criminal penalties. Key Prohibited Practices Operators Must Avoid In investigations and disputes, the following conduct most frequently becomes problematic: First, providing individualized investment advice. The moment an operator gives a member a tailored instruction such as “Do not average down on this stock,” it may constitute a violation of the prohibition on unregistered investment advisory services. Second, guaranteeing profits or covering losses. Statements such as “principal guaranteed” or “fixed monthly returns of 5%” may themselves violate the Capital Markets Act and can result in up to three years’ imprisonment or fines of up to KRW 100 million. Third, false or exaggerated advertising. Posting fabricated profit screenshots, impersonating investors, or claiming superiority over competitors without objective evidence may escalate into fraud charges. Mandatory Compliance Measures and Internal Controls When operating signal groups or investment-information services, the following points must be clearly disclosed on websites, notices, and pinned messages: No one-to-one consultations or asset management services are provided Investment losses are possible and responsibility rests solely with the investor The operator is a registered pseudo-investment advisory business, not a licensed financial investment company In addition, pseudo-investment advisory registrations must be renewed every five years. Failure to complete mandatory education or having a prior violation of financial laws may result in rejection of the registration. For virtual asset (cryptocurrency) signal groups, the Virtual Asset User Protection Act applies. Engaging in insider trading, market manipulation, or unfair trading practices may lead to severe criminal penalties, including imprisonment of one year or more. In particular, pump-and-dump schemes involving coordination with specific projects are currently under intensive regulatory scrutiny. Why Legal Support from Decent Law Firm Matters Decent’s virtual asset and financial regulation team goes beyond simple registration assistance, providing comprehensive management of legal risks across the entire business structure. Formation and operational advisory We design service structures, terms of use, and advertising language to ensure compliance within the scope of pseudo-investment advisory regulations. Criminal investigation defense We respond to allegations of unregistered advisory services, fraud, or unfair trading by developing legal arguments focused on the absence of conspiracy and fraudulent intent. Civil dispute representation We handle investor damage claims by structuring defenses based on the validity of limitation-of-liability clauses and comparative negligence principles. In an evolving regulatory environment, compliance must begin before issues arise, not after enforcement actions commence. If you are concerned about legal risks related to operating a pseudo-investment advisory business or signal group, we recommend consulting with a specialized lawyer for a proactive legal review.
