We Resolve Legal Matters
How can we assist you?
PRACTICES
More-
Crypto
Cryptocurrency, VASP, Coin Exchange, Coin Fraud, Coin Hacking
-
Criminal
Fraud/Embezzlement, Sexual Crime, Drug Crime, Economic Crime, Voice Phishing
-
Corporate & Biz
Startups, Contract Review, Investment Advisory, M&A Advisory, Risk Management
-
Cross-border · Dispute Resolution
International Laws & Regulations, Overseas Company Incorporation, Global Expansion (FLIP), International Investment, International Contracts
-
Civil
Damages, Injunction, Unjust Enrichment, Contract Dispute, Litigation Proxy
-
Class Action
Litigation Representation, Damages Claims, Investment Fraud, Victim Relief, Collective Action
-
Labor · Employment Disputes
Employment Advisory, Serious Accidents Punishment Act, Labor Standards Act, Employment Disputes, Collective Actions
-
Rehabilitation · Bankruptcy
Individual & Corporate Rehabilitation, Bankruptcy, Court Receivership, Debt Relief, Credit Recovery
-
VC · Financial Advisory
VC, IPO, Financial Regulatory Advisory, Internal Control, Legal Due Diligence
-
IP Litigation
Trade Secrets, Intellectual Property, Technology Transfer, R&D, Licensing
-
Divorce · Family
Property Division, Alimony, Mediation, Statutory Share, Inheritance Acceptance
-
Real Estate Disputes · Construction
Leases, Tenancy Disputes, Jeonse Fraud, Sale Agreements, Redevelopment, Permits
-
Administrative
Administrative Orders, Regulatory Dispositions, Administrative Appeals, Licensing & Permits, State Compensation
-
Entertainment
Exclusive Contracts, Contract Termination, Copyright, Publishing, Overseas Expansion
-
Sports
Broadcasting Agreements, Player Contracts, Esports, Sports Agents, International Competitions
LAWYERS
More-
MPHyeonsu “Elliot” Jin
#Cross-border · Dispute Resolution #Crypto #VC · Financial Advisory #IP Litigation #Sports
-
PHokyun “Brad” Lim
#Labor · Employment Disputes #Corporate & Biz #Real Estate Disputes · Construction #VC · Financial Advisory #Cross-border · Dispute Resolution
-
PJiwon “Rosie” Jang
#Crypto #Civil #Criminal #Divorce · Family #Rehabilitation · Bankruptcy
-
Sunghwan “Sean” Lim
#Civil #Criminal #Crypto #Cross-border · Dispute Resolution #Real Estate Disputes · Construction
-
ANaock “Naock” Kim
#Administrative #Labor · Employment Disputes #Corporate & Biz #Civil #IP Litigation #Real Estate Disputes · Construction
-
AYoungyoon ”Yoon” Kwak
#Criminal #Civil #Labor · Employment Disputes #Crypto #Cross-border · Dispute Resolution
-
AJuye ”Elizabeth” Han
#Cross-border · Dispute Resolution #Crypto #VC · Financial Advisory #IP Litigation #Administrative
-
AJinwon “Eric” Park
#Criminal #Civil #Corporate & Biz #Real Estate Disputes · Construction #Administrative #Divorce · Family
-
ABeomhui “Sonny” Won
#Criminal #Civil #Divorce · Family #Real Estate Disputes · Construction #Labor · Employment Disputes #Administrative
-
AHyunsoo “Sue” Rha
#VC · Financial Advisory #IP Litigation #Cross-border · Dispute Resolution #Civil #Administrative
-
ADayoun “Diane” Lee
#Criminal #Civil #Crypto #Corporate & Biz #Cross-border · Dispute Resolution #VC · Financial Advisory
Blogs
More-
Illegal Crypto OTC Trading in Korea: Investigation Risks for Users
In June 2026, the Financial Services Commission (FSC) and the Korea Financial Intelligence Unit (KoFIU) announced that 12 suspected illegal virtual asset operators had been referred to the police following a joint investigation by DAXA and registered virtual asset service providers. According to the announcement, the investigation identified 8 illegal over-the-counter (OTC) crypto dealers and 4 overseas exchanges suspected of conducting business targeting Korean users without proper registration. These operators allegedly attracted users through Telegram, websites, open chat rooms, Korean-language services, KRW payment support, and domestic marketing activities. The Korean financial authorities have also warned that users of unregistered virtual asset service providers may face unexpected disadvantages, including being subject to investigation during the process of verifying counterparties and the source of funds. This article explains the key legal risks that may apply to users of illegal crypto OTC channels in Korea and how investigative authorities may assess the user’s knowledge and intent. Key Laws That May Apply Under Korea’s Act on Reporting and Using Specified Financial Transaction Information, commonly referred to as the Specified Financial Information Act, virtual asset service providers must report to KoFIU before conducting business in Korea. An operator that conducts virtual asset business without proper reporting may be subject to criminal penalties under Article 17 of the Act, including imprisonment of up to 5 years or a fine of up to KRW 50 million. In principle, the direct target of punishment under this provision is the unregistered business operator. However, depending on the circumstances of the transaction, users may also be investigated under other laws. Category Key Issue Potential Penalty Article 3(1) of the Act on Regulation and Punishment of Criminal Proceeds Concealment Disguising the acquisition or disposition of criminal proceeds, disguising the origin of criminal proceeds, or concealing criminal proceeds Imprisonment of up to 5 years or a fine of up to KRW 30 million Article 4 of the Act on Regulation and Punishment of Criminal Proceeds Concealment Receiving criminal proceeds while aware of the relevant circumstances Imprisonment of up to 3 years or a fine of up to KRW 20 million Article 17 of the Specified Financial Information Act Operating an unregistered virtual asset business Imprisonment of up to 5 years or a fine of up to KRW 50 million For ordinary users, direct liability for violating AML obligations under the Specified Financial Information Act is generally limited. In actual investigations, however, authorities tend to focus more closely on the source of funds, the identity of the counterparty, the transaction pattern, and the reason for using an OTC channel instead of a registered exchange. Key Legal Issue: The User’s Knowledge Illegal crypto OTC channels are often considered high-risk because they can make fund flows difficult to trace. For this reason, they may be misused for converting or concealing funds related to crimes such as narcotics, illegal gambling, phishing, or other fraud. In these cases, the key issue is whether the user knew, or could reasonably be seen as having known, that the funds were criminal proceeds or that the transaction structure was abnormal. The Supreme Court of Korea has held that, for a violation of the Criminal Proceeds Concealment Act, it is sufficient for the person to recognize that the property in question constitutes criminal proceeds. The person does not necessarily need to know the exact type or details of the underlying crime. Supreme Court Decision 2006Do5288, January 11, 2007 In other words, even if the user did not know the specific crime involved, intent may still be recognized if the user was aware that the funds were illegal in nature. Therefore, simply saying that the user did not know the operator was unregistered may not be enough. The user must be able to explain, based on the transaction history and structure, why there was no reasonable basis to suspect illegality. Circumstances Investigators May Review When it is difficult to directly confirm a user’s intent, investigative authorities may infer the user’s knowledge from the surrounding circumstances. Common factors include: · Use of unofficial trading channels Trading through Telegram channels, open chat rooms, or private OTC groups instead of registered exchanges. · Repeated or continuous transactions Using the same method over a long period of time or conducting multiple transactions. · Unclear source of funds Difficulty identifying where the funds came from or who the true counterparty was. · Abnormal conditions compared to registered exchanges Using a structure that allows KRW payments, fast conversion, or trading without proper identity verification. Authorities usually do not rely on a single factor alone. Instead, they assess the overall transaction period, frequency, amount, channel characteristics, and fund flow to determine whether the user may have recognized the illegality of the transaction. Decent Law Firm Virtual Asset Practice Group Investigations involving users of illegal crypto OTC channels often involve multiple legal issues at the same time, including violations of the Specified Financial Information Act, the nature of the transaction funds, and whether the user had knowledge of criminal proceeds. Decent Law Firm’s Virtual Asset Practice Group has advised and represented clients in matters involving unregistered virtual asset service providers, OTC crypto transactions, and criminal proceeds concealment allegations from the early stages of investigation. If you have been contacted by the police or prosecutors in Korea, or if you are unsure about the nature of the allegations, it is important to review your transaction history and response strategy before attending any investigative interview. Source: Financial Services Commission, Press Release on Caution Against Using and Trading with Illegal Virtual Asset Operators, June 24, 2026 This content is provided for general informational purposes only and does not constitute legal advice for any specific case.
-
Crypto Referral Liability in Korea: Why the FSC Issued a Warning on Unregistered Virtual Asset Service Providers
Sharing overseas crypto exchange referral links on YouTube, Telegram, or open chat rooms may seem like simple advertising. However, in its press release dated June 24, 2026, the Financial Services Commission (FSC) stated that referral or recommendation-link activities may be viewed as assisting unregistered virtual asset business operations. The FSC also noted that referrers themselves may be subject to criminal liability depending on the circumstances. If you operate or participate in crypto referral marketing, private stablecoin exchange, or promotion of overseas crypto exchanges targeting Korean users, it is important to review whether your activities may raise issues under Korea’s Specified Financial Information Act. Key Points from the FSC Warning The FSC explained that, under the Specified Financial Information Act, any entity conducting virtual asset business targeting Korean users must be reported to the Korea Financial Intelligence Unit (KoFIU), unless it is one of the 28 registered virtual asset service providers. If an entity conducts virtual asset trading, exchange, transfer, custody, brokerage, or intermediary services as a business without proper reporting, this may constitute a violation of the Specified Financial Information Act. Unregistered virtual asset business activities may be punishable by imprisonment of up to 5 years or a fine of up to KRW 50 million. The FSC also noted that, after the amended Specified Financial Information Act takes effect in August 2026, those involved in unregistered illegal business activities may face additional restrictions. These may include restrictions on becoming a major shareholder of a domestic virtual asset service provider or serving as a representative or executive officer for a certain period. In this sense, the FSC press release is not merely a general user warning. It can also be understood as a signal that Korean authorities may strengthen investigations and sanctions against unregistered virtual asset service providers and those who assist their business activities. Three Types of Illegal Activity Highlighted by the FSC The FSC identified three major types of illegal virtual asset business activities recently observed in Korea. First, overseas exchanges conducting business in Korea without reporting. Even if an exchange is based overseas, Korea’s Specified Financial Information Act may apply if the exchange conducts business targeting Korean users. Factors such as Korean-language websites, KRW payment support, Korean user acquisition events, and domestic marketing activities may be considered together. Second, private stablecoin exchange businesses. Private exchange operators who buy, sell, or exchange stablecoins such as USDT for KRW may also raise legal issues. These services may target foreign students, tourists, foreign residents in Korea, or users who wish to avoid identity exposure. Even if the operator claims that the activity was merely a private exchange, it may still be viewed as an unregistered virtual asset business if repetition, fees, customer solicitation, and business structure are confirmed. Third, SNS-based referral promotion. This refers to cases where a person receives commissions from an overseas virtual asset service provider and promotes that exchange through YouTube, Telegram, open chat rooms, or similar channels. In particular, if the promotion is combined with referral links, invitation codes, fee paybacks, VIP chat rooms, or user-management activities, it may go beyond simple advertising and be viewed as user solicitation or assistance to unregistered business operations. Why Crypto Referral Marketing May Become a Criminal Issue Crypto referral programs are commonly operated in the following structure. 1. Distribution of overseas exchange referral links or invitation codes 2. Receipt of commissions based on referred users’ trading volume 3. Guidance on how to use the exchange through Telegram or open chat rooms 4. Promotion based on events, profit claims, fee discounts, or other incentives 5. Repeated promotion targeting Korean users The legal issue is whether this structure is merely advertising or whether it assists an unregistered virtual asset service provider’s business in Korea. In its press release, the FSC specifically warned against participating in referral or recommendation-link solicitation activities and stated that referrers may also be subject to criminal liability. Therefore, YouTubers, influencers, investment chat room operators, Telegram channel operators, and open chat room administrators may be investigated even if they did not directly operate the exchange. Investigators may review how the promotion was conducted, how referral fees were paid, whether there was a contractual relationship with the exchange, and how Korean users were recruited. Can Private Exchange or OTC Transactions Also Lead to Investigation? The same issue may arise in private exchange or OTC transactions. A person may believe that they were simply buying or selling crypto. However, the following circumstances may raise issues under the Specified Financial Information Act. 1. Repeated transactions with an unspecified number of users 2. Receipt of fees or exchange-rate margins for each transaction 3. Customer solicitation through Telegram, KakaoTalk, or SNS 4. Continuous exchange between KRW and stablecoins such as USDT 5. Brokerage or intermediary activity for the convenience of others The Supreme Court of Korea has also held that, unlike an ordinary exchange user, a person may be considered a virtual asset service provider if they continuously and repeatedly conduct virtual asset transactions for the benefit of an unspecified number of customers or users and receive compensation for doing so. The key issue is whether the activity was simple holding or investment, or whether it can be viewed as repeated, compensated virtual asset transactions conducted as a business. Why Ordinary Users Should Not Simply Assume They Are Safe Using an unregistered exchange or private exchange service does not automatically make a user a suspect under the Specified Financial Information Act. However, the FSC has warned that users of illegal virtual asset operators may face unexpected disadvantages. For example, the user’s funds may become mixed with criminal funds, or the user may become subject to investigation during the process of verifying counterparties and the source of funds. The following situations may make it difficult to characterize the person as a mere user. 1. Sharing referral links with acquaintances and receiving rewards 2. Repeatedly encouraging others to use an unregistered exchange 3. Introducing private exchange transactions and receiving commissions 4. Dealing with funds suspected to be connected to phishing, narcotics, fraud, or other crimes 5. Allowing one’s bank account to be used as a deposit or withdrawal channel for multiple people In such cases, authorities may review not only potential violations of the Specified Financial Information Act, but also issues under the Electronic Financial Transactions Act, the Criminal Proceeds Concealment Act, fraud aiding and abetting, or other money-laundering-related allegations. If You Have Already Been Contacted by Investigators If you have been contacted by the police, KoFIU, or another investigative authority, the first step is to accurately identify your role. The defense strategy will differ depending on whether you were a mere user, promoter, broker, intermediary, or private exchange operator. At the early stage of investigation, it is important to organize the following materials. · How you joined or used the exchange · Referral link or referral code usage history · Commission or fee settlement records · Telegram, KakaoTalk, or open chat room messages · Virtual asset deposit and withdrawal records · KRW bank account transaction records · Contracts or settlement records with overseas exchanges or advertisers · Whether you recruited Korean users The important point is not simply to claim that you were only a user. Before making a statement, it is necessary to analyze how investigators may view the transaction structure, revenue structure, promotion method, user recruitment, repetition, compensation, and awareness of illegality. How Decent Law Firm Can Assist Decent Law Firm has reviewed a wide range of matters involving virtual asset service provider reporting, violations of the Specified Financial Information Act, crypto referral marketing, OTC and P2P transactions, stablecoin exchange, and criminal cases involving overseas exchanges. Virtual asset investigations are not limited to crypto transaction records. Investigative authorities may review Telegram messages, referral-fee settlement structures, relationships with exchanges, KRW bank account flows, wallet address movements, advertising phrases, and user recruitment methods. Before attending an investigative interview, the following issues should be carefully reviewed. 1. Whether the activity constitutes a virtual asset business under the Specified Financial Information Act 2. Whether the alleged unregistered business activity had continuity, repetition, and compensation 3. Whether referral promotion was simple advertising or user solicitation 4. Whether private exchange activity was personal trading or business operation 5. Whether the matter may expand into money laundering or criminal proceeds allegations 6. What should and should not be stated during a police interview If you have been contacted by investigators in relation to crypto referrals, private exchange, or use of an unregistered overseas exchange, legal review before your initial statement is essential. Decent Law Firm’s Virtual Asset Practice Group analyzes the transaction structure and investigation issues together to provide a response strategy tailored to each client’s situation. Key Takeaways The FSC press release dated June 24, 2026 is not merely a general warning about unregistered virtual asset service providers. It clearly indicates that overseas exchanges targeting Korean users, private stablecoin exchange operators, and SNS-based crypto referral promoters may all be subject to investigation under the Specified Financial Information Act.In particular, because the FSC officially mentioned that referral participants may also face criminal liability, YouTubers, influencers, channel operators, and investment chat room operators should immediately review their existing promotion structures. After being contacted by investigators, simply saying that you did not know may not be enough. The first step should be to legally assess whether your conduct may be viewed as business operation, brokerage, intermediation, or solicitation under Korean law. Source: Financial Services Commission, Press Release on Caution Against Using and Trading with Illegal Virtual Asset Operators, June 24, 2026. This content is provided for general informational purposes only and does not constitute legal advice for any specific case.
-
How to File an Unfair Dismissal Remedy Application
If you have lost your job without any prior notice, for reasons that are impossible to understand, or without being given any reason at all, the frustration and sense of injustice can only truly be understood by those who have experienced it. However, if you know “this,” there is no need to panic. Korean labor law clearly provides that an employer may not dismiss an employee without just cause. A dismissal that violates this rule may constitute unfair dismissal, and through a remedy application filed with the Labor Relations Commission, you may be able to seek reinstatement or monetary compensation. In fact, thousands of employees recover their rights every year through unfair dismissal remedy applications. Does This Qualify as Unfair Dismissal? Unfair dismissal refers to a dismissal made without just cause, or a dismissal carried out without following the procedures required by law. If any of the following applies to your situation, you may have grounds to suspect unfair dismissal. - The reason for dismissal is unclear or difficult to accept If you were only told something vague, such as “due to company circumstances” or “you are not a good fit,” without any specific explanation, there may be no legitimate reason for dismissal. - You were suddenly dismissed without prior notice Under the Labor Standards Act, an employer must either give at least 30 days’ advance notice of dismissal or pay at least 30 days’ ordinary wages in lieu of notice. If the employer fails to comply with this requirement, the employer may be obligated to pay dismissal notice allowance and may also be subject to criminal penalties. - You did not receive written notice of dismissal A dismissal must be made in writing, and the written notice must specify both the reason for dismissal and the effective date of dismissal. If you were only notified verbally, the dismissal procedure itself may be unlawful. - It was a managerial dismissal, but the legal requirements were not met For a dismissal due to business reasons, the employer must satisfy strict legal requirements, including urgent managerial necessity, efforts to avoid dismissal, reasonable and fair selection of employees to be dismissed, and prior consultation with employee representatives. - It was a disciplinary dismissal, but no disciplinary committee procedure was followed If the employer ignored disciplinary procedures required under the rules of employment or a collective bargaining agreement, the dismissal may be found unfair due to procedural defects. Please carefully review the points above. If any of them apply, you should actively consider filing a remedy application. How Does an Unfair Dismissal Remedy Application Proceed? Where to file and the deadline An unfair dismissal remedy application is filed with the Regional Labor Relations Commission. The deadline is within three months from the date the dismissal took effect. This is an exclusion period, meaning that once the period expires, the right to file a remedy application itself is extinguished. Procedure Once the application is filed with the Regional Labor Relations Commission, the process generally proceeds in the following order: investigation by an investigator → hearing session → decision. If either party disagrees with the decision, they may file an appeal with the National Labor Relations Commission within 10 days from the date they receive the remedial order or dismissal decision. If no appeal is filed within that period, the decision becomes final and binding. If a party disagrees with the decision of the National Labor Relations Commission, the matter may be further challenged through administrative litigation. What remedies are available? If the remedy application is accepted, the outcome generally falls into one of two categories. Reinstatement : The employee is reinstated to their original position, and the employer must also pay wages equivalent to what the employee would have earned during the dismissal period. Monetary compensation order : If the employee does not wish to return to work, they may choose monetary compensation instead. In this case, compensation is generally calculated based on the wages equivalent to the period from the date of dismissal to the date of the decision. Unlike a reinstatement order, where wages equivalent to the period from dismissal until actual reinstatement may be paid, the calculation period for monetary compensation ends on the date of the decision. Therefore, the longer the proceedings continue, the greater the difference in compensation may become between the two options. What if the company proposes a settlement during the proceedings? It is not uncommon for an employer to propose a settlement while the remedy application is ongoing. The amount of settlement compensation can vary significantly depending on the circumstances of the case. Therefore, if you receive a settlement proposal, it is important to have an expert review whether the proposed amount is appropriate. There are also several points that must be checked before entering into a settlement. Whether the settlement may affect your eligibility for unemployment benefits Whether the settlement terms include unfavorable clauses, such as waiver of future claims or litigation rights Whether there are still unpaid wages, severance pay, or other outstanding amounts separate from the settlement payment Before signing any settlement agreement, you must carefully review its contents. Can I Receive Unemployment Benefits After Being Unfairly Dismissed? Yes, you may be eligible. Unemployment benefits are generally available when the employee’s separation from employment is involuntary, rather than a voluntary resignation. Because unfair dismissal is a unilateral termination made against the employee’s will, it may be recognized as involuntary separation, making the employee eligible for unemployment benefits. You may also apply for unemployment benefits while the unfair dismissal remedy procedure is still ongoing. However, if the Labor Relations Commission later issues a reinstatement order, the employee’s unemployment status may be deemed to have been retroactively resolved as of the date of the reinstatement order, regardless of whether the employee actually returns to work or receives wages. As a result, there may be situations where unemployment benefits already received must be returned. This is something you should keep in mind in advance. You should also confirm in advance whether you meet the eligibility requirements, such as having at least 180 insured working days under employment insurance during the 18-month base period prior to the date of separation. You Do Not Have to Go Through This Difficult Process Alone What can go wrong if you handle it alone? In an unfair dismissal remedy case, the employer bears the burden of proving that the dismissal was justified. However, in practice, employees may still be placed at a disadvantage if they fail to secure proper evidence or make procedural mistakes. Employers often immediately appoint legal counsel or certified labor consultants to respond to the claim. This creates a significant gap in information and preparation from the very beginning. In particular, when a settlement proposal is made, it can be extremely difficult to determine on your own whether the proposed amount is reasonable or whether the settlement terms contain unfavorable provisions. You must also strategically decide which option is most beneficial for you: reinstatement, monetary compensation, or settlement. A single mistake in the early stages can completely change the outcome of the case. How Decent Law Office Can Help - Review of the dismissal circumstances and assessment of unfair dismissal We carefully analyze the circumstances of the dismissal, the stated reasons, and the procedures followed, and first assess the likelihood of obtaining relief. - Preparation of remedy application documents and representation throughout the procedure From preparing the application to responding at the hearing session, we assist you throughout the entire Labor Relations Commission process. - Settlement negotiation support We review whether the employer’s settlement proposal is appropriate and negotiate toward terms that are more favorable to our client. - Strategic selection of the best direction — reinstatement, monetary compensation, or settlement Our goal is not simply to “win.” We develop a strategy aimed at achieving the best possible outcome based on each client’s circumstances and objectives. If you have unfairly lost your job, Decent Law Office will stand with you until the end. Before it is too late, we recommend seeking legal advice first.
-
A Practical Guide to Penalties for Unemployment Benefits Fraud
What Is Unemployment Benefits Fraud? Unemployment benefits fraud refers to receiving unemployment benefits through false or improper means despite failing to meet the eligibility requirements under the Employment Insurance Act. Article 61 of the Employment Insurance Act provides that payment of job-seeking benefits may be restricted for any person who has received, or attempted to receive, unemployment benefits through false or otherwise improper means. A wider range of conduct than many people expect may constitute fraudulent receipt. Common examples include the following. Failure to Report Employment or Reemployment This refers to cases where a person has been reemployed or has started part-time work but continues to receive unemployment benefits without reporting it to the employment center. Even a single day of work must be reported. Concealing Freelance or Part-Time Income This refers to cases where a person earns income but fails to report it, thinking, “It is not formal employment.” Freelance service fees, platform work income, and similar income are all subject to reporting obligations. False Reporting of the Reason for Separation This refers to cases where a person voluntarily resigned but falsely reports the separation as a recommended resignation, termination by employer, or expiration of contract. Because this is an intentional disguise designed to satisfy the requirements for unemployment benefits, it is treated particularly seriously. Receiving Benefits While Staying Overseas This refers to cases where a person receives unemployment benefits while staying overseas for an extended period during the benefit period, despite being required to engage in job-seeking activities. Failure to Report Opening a Business This refers to cases where a person registers a business or effectively begins operating a business but fails to report it. Penalties and Fines for Unemployment Benefits Fraud If fraudulent receipt is detected, the matter does not end simply by returning the money. In addition to civil recovery, criminal punishment may also follow. ① Full Repayment + Additional Collection of Up to Five Times the Amount Under Article 62 of the Employment Insurance Act, the full amount of the fraudulently received benefits must be returned. However, this is not the end. The Ministry of Employment and Labor may additionally collect up to twice the fraudulently received amount in cases of individual fraudulent receipt, and up to five times the amount where the recipient colluded with an employer. For example, if a person fraudulently received KRW 3 million on their own, they may be required to pay up to KRW 6 million in additional collection. If the person colluded with an employer, the additional collection may reach up to KRW 15 million. ② Criminal Punishment — Imprisonment or Fine Article 116 of the Employment Insurance Act provides that a person who fraudulently receives unemployment benefits may be punished by imprisonment for up to three years or a fine of up to KRW 30 million. However, where the fraudulent receipt was committed in collusion with an employer, the punishment is aggravated to imprisonment for up to five years or a fine of up to KRW 50 million. If the amount or method is serious, imprisonment may be imposed rather than a simple fine. The fact that a criminal record may remain should also not be overlooked. ③ Restriction on Future Eligibility If a person is caught fraudulently receiving unemployment benefits, their eligibility for future unemployment benefits may be restricted. This means that even if the person later becomes genuinely unemployed, they may face disadvantages in receiving benefits. How Is Fraudulent Receipt Actually Detected? Thinking “surely they won’t investigate me” is dangerous. The Ministry of Employment and Labor and the Korea Workers’ Compensation & Welfare Service detect fraudulent recipients through various channels. Data Matching with the National Tax Service and Four Major Social Insurance Systems This is the most common detection route. If income is reported to the National Tax Service or a four-major-insurance acquisition record appears during the unemployment benefit period, a mismatch is automatically detected. Even where the recipient was unaware, fraudulent receipt may be detected if the employer reported the person’s four-major-insurance enrollment. Reward System for Reports A reward system is in place for third parties who report fraudulent receipt of unemployment benefits. There are many cases where fraudulent receipt is detected through reports by coworkers, acquaintances, or even former employers. SNS and Card Transaction Records Investigations may begin where work-related posts are uploaded on social media during the benefit period or where business-related expenses are identified through transaction records. This route is particularly common in cases involving failure to report the opening of a business. Does Voluntary Reporting Make a Difference? If a person reports the issue voluntarily before being detected, the disadvantages may be significantly reduced. The Ministry of Employment and Labor provides benefits such as reduction or exemption of additional collection for voluntary reporters. Because additional collection may otherwise reach up to five times the fraudulently received amount, voluntary reporting may result in the matter being resolved in practice through repayment of the principal amount only. Voluntary reporting may also serve as a favorable sentencing factor when determining whether criminal punishment should be imposed. However, before making a report, it is advisable to first understand the amount to be repaid and the specific circumstances of the case. Lawyer’s Advice — If You Receive a Notice of Investigation When Can the Argument of “No Intent” Be Accepted? In unemployment benefits fraud cases, arguments such as “I did not know” or “I had no intent” are more difficult to have accepted than many people expect. Because employment centers expressly inform applicants of their reporting obligations when applying for benefits, it is difficult to deny intent merely by claiming ignorance. However, intent may be denied, or the circumstances may be reflected favorably in sentencing, in cases where the employer unilaterally enrolled the person in the four major social insurance systems, where the income from short-term part-time work was extremely small, or where there was a genuine misunderstanding about the scope of the reporting obligation. If You Receive a Summons or Investigation Notice Once you receive a notice of investigation from the Ministry of Employment and Labor or the police, responding alone can be risky. This is because your statements may directly affect the level of criminal punishment. Before attending an investigation, it is important to consult a legal professional and review the direction of your statements and whether voluntary reporting is appropriate. If you are under investigation for unemployment benefits fraud or have been contacted by the Ministry of Employment and Labor, please contact Decent Law Firm before it is too late. Our labor and criminal law teams will review your case and guide you toward the best possible response.
-
Overseas Futures Trading Lawyer: What You Need to Know Before an Investigation Begins
Why Domestic Promotion of Overseas Futures and FX Margin Trading Can Be Problematic Trading overseas futures or FX margin products is not, in itself, completely prohibited under Korean law. The issue arises when individuals or entities provide brokerage-related services or facilitate such trading activities within Korea without the required authorization. Under the Financial Investment Services and Capital Markets Act ("Capital Markets Act"), any person engaging in the business of trading, brokerage, or intermediation of financial investment products must obtain authorization from the Financial Services Commission. Overseas futures and FX margin products are classified as derivatives under the Capital Markets Act. Depending on the manner and extent of a person's involvement, different offenses and penalties may apply. For example, legal issues may differ depending on whether a person: Assists clients in opening accounts on overseas platforms such as MT4 or MT5; Operates a trading signal or "copy-trading" community; Receives and manages client funds directly. Case Study: “I Only Helped Connect People to the Platform” Mr. A had traded overseas futures for several years and built a track record of profitable trading. As his results became known among acquaintances, several people expressed interest in participating. Mr. A began assisting them with MT5 account registration and deposit procedures. He later operated a KakaoTalk group chat and Telegram channel where he provided real-time trading signals and received monthly subscription fees from members. Mr. A believed that he was merely providing information because each customer opened and managed their own account. His position was simple: "The investment decisions were made by the customers themselves." However, he eventually received notice that he had become the subject of a Financial Supervisory Service (FSS) investigation, which later developed into a criminal investigation. Investigators concluded that Mr. A's conduct went beyond merely providing market information. They focused on the fact that he continuously communicated with members in real time and repeatedly instructed them on entry and exit points for trades in exchange for compensation. When evidence emerged suggesting direct involvement in certain members' trading accounts, the allegations became significantly more serious. Why “Providing Information Only” Can Still Lead to Violations of the Capital Markets Act This is where many people misunderstand the legal risks. As involvement becomes more substantial, the potential offenses become more serious. Investigators typically focus on factors such as the following: Commercial Nature of the Activity Did the operator repeatedly collect fees while promoting services to the general public? → Potential issue: Violation of regulations governing quasi-investment advisory businesses Interactive Communication Did the operator provide individualized trading recommendations through open chat rooms, Telegram channels, or similar platforms? → Potential issue: Unregistered investment advisory business Automated Trading Execution Did the operator use API integrations or copy-trading systems that automatically replicated trades for clients? → Potential issue: Operating an investment discretionary management business without registration Involvement in Client Funds Did client funds pass through the operator's accounts, or did the operator directly participate in the trading process? → Potential issue: Unauthorized investment brokerage business Since August 2024, Korean regulations have prohibited quasi-investment advisory businesses from operating interactive communication channels with subscribers. This is one reason why the argument that someone was "only providing information" may no longer be persuasive from the outset. Additional Charges Such as Illegal Fundraising and Fraud May Also Apply If investors were recruited using representations such as: "Guaranteed monthly returns" "No risk of principal loss" "Guaranteed profits" additional criminal liability may arise under the Act on the Regulation of Conducting Fund-Raising Business Without Permission. This law prohibits raising funds from an unspecified number of individuals while promising repayment of principal, interest, or other guaranteed returns without proper authorization. Where an operator attracts investors through a trading signal service or investment community while emphasizing guaranteed profits, authorities may pursue multiple charges simultaneously, including: Violations of the Capital Markets Act; Violations of laws regulating unauthorized fundraising activities; Fraud. For example, in 2025, the Gyeonggi Nambu Provincial Police Agency arrested 28 individuals accused of raising approximately KRW 140 billion from more than 2,400 investors by claiming they would generate profits through FX margin trading. Authorities reportedly applied charges including fraud, illegal fundraising, and violations of the Door-to-Door Sales Act. This illustrates why overseas futures and FX margin trading cases rarely involve only a single allegation. What to Review If You Have Been Contacted by Investigators If any of the following situations apply to you, legal review before questioning may be advisable: ▪ Providing paid overseas futures or FX margin trading signals through Telegram, KakaoTalk, or similar platforms; ▪ Assisting clients with MT4, MT5, or similar platform account openings while receiving commissions or referral fees; ▪ Operating copy-trading services using clients' API keys or automated trading systems. Depending on the specific facts, authorities may allege: Violations relating to quasi-investment advisory businesses; Unregistered investment advisory activities; Unregistered investment discretionary management services; Unauthorized investment brokerage; Illegal fundraising activities; Fraud. The direction of statements made during the early stages of an investigation can significantly influence the development of the case. Understanding the legal structure of the allegations before attending an interview is therefore critical. The Digital Asset Practice Team at Decent Law Firm regularly advises individuals and businesses involved in investigations concerning unauthorized overseas futures and FX margin trading activities. If you have been contacted by investigators or have already been scheduled for questioning, it is important to understand the nature of the allegations and the overall structure of the case before appearing for an interview.
-
Need Compensation for an Investment Scam?
Does Any of This Sound Familiar? ✔️ Cryptocurrency / Virtual Asset Scam Patterns You were invited to a high-return crypto investment group through social media or an open chat room. After making a small initial investment, you actually received profits. Once you invested more money, withdrawals suddenly became unavailable. The person in charge disappeared, or the investment platform itself vanished. ✔️ Stock Recommendation Service Scam Patterns It started as a free stock recommendation service. You initially made profits from recommended stocks. You were encouraged to join a VIP group or paid service. After paying hundreds or even thousands of dollars in fees, your losses continued to grow. If any of the above applies to you, there is a significant possibility that you have been the victim of investment fraud. Before blaming yourself, consider whether legal remedies may be available. Why Compensation May Be Possible — Legal Grounds Many victims ask: "I've already transferred the money. Can I still recover it?" In many cases, the answer is yes. Criminal Complaint (Fraud Investigation) Filing a criminal complaint can initiate an official investigation and enable law enforcement authorities to trace bank accounts and investigate criminal proceeds. In addition, asset-freezing measures such as preliminary attachment orders or payment suspension procedures under applicable financial fraud regulations may help prevent the dissipation of assets. Civil Damages Claim Victims may also pursue the return of their losses through civil litigation, either independently or alongside criminal proceedings. Where multiple individuals participated in the fraud, all participants may be held jointly liable under the principle of joint tort liability. This means that victims may seek recovery of the full amount of their losses from any one of the responsible parties. Furthermore, since the implementation of South Korea's Virtual Asset User Protection Act on July 19, 2024, the legal framework for responding to virtual asset-related fraud has become stronger than before. Why Legal Representation Matters Recovering losses from investment scams is difficult not because victims lack knowledge of the law, but because fraudsters deliberately conceal their tracks. Fraud organizations often: Split funds across multiple accounts Operate through multiple entities or shell companies Launder proceeds through virtual assets and overseas platforms As a result, a simple complaint or basic police report is often insufficient to uncover the full structure of the scheme. Even when a case is formally reported, investigations may end with "suspect unknown" or "insufficient evidence" unless the case is properly supported. Effective recovery efforts often require: Early evidence preservation strategies (chat records, bank transfers, platform screenshots, etc.) Experience working with virtual asset exchanges and tracing transactions Coordinated group actions involving multiple victims The ability to pursue both criminal and civil proceedings simultaneously Without an experienced virtual asset litigation team, navigating these processes can be extremely challenging. What Makes Decent Law Firm Different Decent Law Firm operates a dedicated team focused on virtual asset disputes and investment fraud cases. Attorneys who understand cryptocurrency exchanges, blockchain transactions, and digital asset investigations approach these cases from an entirely different starting point. Our Experience Includes: Cooperation with virtual asset exchanges and regulatory authorities Simultaneous criminal and civil recovery strategies Representation of groups of victims in collective actions Development of evidence preservation and recovery strategies tailored to victims In investment fraud cases, time is critical. The longer the delay, the greater the risk that assets will be dispersed and evidence will disappear. Prompt action can significantly improve the likelihood of recovery. One Thing You Should Do Right Now Preserve Your Evidence. Keep any materials you still have, including: KakaoTalk or messaging app conversations Bank transfer records Screenshots of investment platforms or applications Wallet addresses and account information Contact details of the individuals involved Even if the other party has disappeared, and even if the platform no longer exists, legal options may still be available. The sooner action is taken, the better the chances of protecting your rights and recovering your losses.