-
No-Charge DecisionCrypto
No-Charge Decision in a Crypto Copy Trading Investment Consulting Fraud Case
Our client worked as a sales representative at a virtual asset investment consulting company. His role was to guide customers through the process of registering with an overseas cryptocurrency exchange and to explain how futures trading and copy trading worked. The fee structure was performance-based. The company would receive a portion of the customer’s profits only if profits were generated. After the customer suffered investment losses, the customer filed a criminal complaint alleging fraud. The complainant claimed that the recommended exchange was a fabricated program designed to display false profits, and that the company had solicited the investment from the beginning with the intent to misappropriate the funds. As a result, our client was summoned by the investigative authorities as a suspect in a fraud case.
-
Provision of a Legal Review MemorandumCrypto
Legal Advisory on an Overseas Incorporation Structure for a Virtual Asset Auto-Trading Service
DECENT Law Firm was retained by a startup operating a subscription-based auto-trading software service that connects to virtual asset exchange APIs and executes algorithm-based trading strategies. The client had already incorporated a Korean entity and was preparing to expand its service to non-Korean users. Before launching the service more broadly overseas, the client sought legal advice on where to establish an overseas entity and how to structure transactions between the Korean entity and the foreign entity.
-
Partial Victory for the PlaintiffCivil
Guaranteed-Return Investment Fraud: Recovery of Investment Funds Through Tort Liability Claim
The client invested KRW 10 million in an online marketplace consignment operation business after being told that a fixed return would be guaranteed for each investment unit. The contract expressly provided that the full investment amount would be refunded if the promised returns were not paid. In practice, however, the promised returns were not properly paid, and the client received no meaningful response despite requesting a refund. Upon reviewing the business structure, it became clear that the business was operated by randomly collecting large numbers of products and relying on the sale of only a small portion of them by chance. The business also lacked sufficient underlying capital. In other words, stable payment of guaranteed returns had been structurally unrealistic from the outset.
-
No-Charge DecisionCriminal
No-Charge Decision in a CEO’s Business Embezzlement Case
Our client took over the management of a cosmetics company originally founded by his father and served as its CEO. As the company’s financial condition deteriorated, he made every effort to keep the business alive. He provided his personal real estate as collateral for the company’s obligations and transferred his own funds directly into the company’s bank account. Despite these efforts, the company eventually had to close down. Shortly afterward, former employees filed a criminal complaint against the client for alleged business embezzlement. The complainants alleged that the client had misused company funds for entertainment expenses, rent for a high-end apartment, vehicle lease payments, personal insurance premiums, and transfers to his personal account. The alleged amount of embezzlement was approximately KRW 450 million. Feeling that the accusations were unfair, the client sought assistance from DECENT Law Firm.
-
Non-Prosecution Decision: No Charges Due to Insuffic...Criminal
Non-Prosecution in an Attempted Intimidation Case Involving an Online Community Comment
The client was serving as a social service worker in Korea when he came across an online community post criticizing a particular political figure. In response to the post, he left a comment using strong and emotionally charged language. Shortly after posting the comment, the client realized that the wording had gone too far and voluntarily deleted it. However, the post had already been reported as a potentially threatening statement. The client was investigated on suspicion of attempted intimidation and retained DECENT Law Firm during the police investigation. The police later referred the case to the prosecution. The alleged offense was attempted intimidation under Article 283 of the Korean Criminal Act, in conjunction with Article 286 on attempted crimes.
-
No-Charge Decision: Non-Referral by the PoliceCriminal
No-Charge Decision in a Sex Crime Investigation Where the Relationship Was Consensual
The client had contact with a hostess at an entertainment establishment in Korea and was later accused of sexual offenses by the same individual. The allegations included quasi-rape, attempted quasi-rape, coercion, and rape. The client maintained that the encounter was consensual, but the complainant’s statement directly contradicted his account. Because the investigation had already begun, the client retained DECENT Law Firm for legal representation.
-
No Indictment by the ProsecutionCriminal
No Indictment in an Online Defamation Case Under Korea’s Network Act
Our client operated a private academy in the education sector and regularly held online information sessions for parents. During one of these sessions, the client referred to posts and comments that had already been publicly uploaded on a well-known online community for parents. The purpose was to explain general points of caution within the education industry. The client did not mention the name of any specific academy or directly identify any particular business. However, another academy in the same industry filed a criminal complaint, alleging that the client had effectively referred to its business and spread false information, thereby damaging its reputation and interfering with its business operations. The client came to Decent Law Firm after the investigation had already begun. The alleged charges were defamation by false statements of fact under Article 70(2) of the Act on Promotion of Information and Communications Network Utilization and Information Protection (the “Network Act”) and obstruction of business.
-
No-crime decisionCriminal
Crypto Auto-Trading Software Operator — No-Crime Decision on Fraud & FSTRA Charges
The client developed and operated a subscription-based automated cryptocurrency trading software. The complainant used the program to invest directly through their own exchange account, but incurred losses following a sharp market downturn. Despite the client's repeated advice to cut losses, the complainant refused and continued holding positions until liquidation. The complainant subsequently filed a criminal complaint alleging that the client had induced investment through false representations of profitability, bringing charges of fraud and violation of the Act on Reporting and Using Specified Financial Transaction Information (FSTRA).
-
Full judgment in favor of the plaintiffCivil
Full Recovery of Contracted Amount Through Civil Claim — Following Criminal No-Crime Decision
The client agreed to sell a freight truck to an acquaintance, transferring the vehicle on the promise that the acquaintance would repay KRW 21.6 million in monthly instalments through income generated by operating it. No payments were ever made. The client later discovered the acquaintance had already sold the vehicle to a third party. A criminal fraud complaint was filed, but the investigating authority issued a no-crime decision, accepting the acquaintance's claim that existing debts had prevented repayment. The client then approached Decent Law to explore civil options.
-
Non-Indictment Decision by the ProsecutionCriminal
No Charges in Alleged Criminal Proceeds Concealment Case Involving KRW 630 Million Transfer
Our client, Mr. A, had maintained a long-standing financial relationship with an acquaintance, Mr. B, for more than 10 years. During that time, Mr. B committed a large-scale fraud against a construction company, and approximately KRW 630 million of the fraud proceeds was transferred into Mr. A’s bank account. Mr. A believed the transfer was repayment of existing debts arising from their prior financial dealings and used the funds to repay loans and credit card balances. The construction company subsequently filed a criminal complaint against Mr. A, alleging violations of the Act on Regulation and Punishment of Criminal Proceeds Concealment, embezzlement, and aiding violations of the Financial Real Name Transaction Act. After becoming subject to a police investigation, Mr. A retained DECENT Law Firm for legal representation.
-
No-Charge Decision (Case Not Referred to Prosecution)Criminal
Fraud Allegations Based on an Alleged Romantic Relationship — Case Closed Without Prosecution
Our client, Ms. A, was a university senior working part-time in the service industry to cover her tuition. Through her work, she came to know a regular customer, Mr. B, and the two began meeting on a regular basis. The relationship between Ms. A and Mr. B began as a compensated companionship arrangement and did not evolve into an exclusive romantic relationship. Even after they began meeting outside of her workplace, the same compensation arrangement continued, with payments made for time spent together. Despite this, Mr. B filed a criminal complaint alleging fraud. He claimed that Ms. A had posed as his girlfriend and deceived him into providing living expenses totaling approximately KRW 10 million, on the false promise that she would repay him after finding employment. Ms. A was blindsided. She had never asked to borrow money, never promised repayment, and had simply received payment at each meeting as agreed. Upon receiving a police summons, she came to DECENT Law Firm for assistance.
-
Non-Referral DecisionCrypto
If You Were Reported for Fraud While Running a Crypto Referral — A Real Case of Non-Referral Decision
Our client worked at a cryptocurrency-related company, providing coin futures trading information to customers. When a complainant suffered forced liquidation after independently maintaining a high-leverage position, the client was reported to police on charges of fraud. The complainant alleged that our client had induced investment by implying guaranteed returns, and had concealed referral commission income earned through a crypto referral (exchange referral code) arrangement. DECENT's Virtual Asset Practice Team accompanied the client during police questioning from day one, and submitted two separate written defense opinions — arguing the absence of fraudulent intent and the lack of causal connection between our client's conduct and the complainant's losses. The police ultimately issued a non-referral decision on grounds of insufficient evidence.
