Beomhui “Sonny” Won
A sonny@decentlaw.ioSonny leverages an outstanding track record in major criminal cases, including drug and sex offenses, to provide tailored legal solutions across criminal, civil, and family law matters.
- Criminal
- Civil
- Divorce · Family
- Real Estate Disputes · Construction
- Labor · Employment Disputes
- Administrative
관련소식
-
언론보도Decent Law Firm Welcomes Attorneys Park Jinwon, Won Beomhee, and Na Hyeonsu
Decent Law Firm announced on July 14 that it has welcomed Attorneys Park Jinwon, Won Beomhee, and Na Hyeonsu to strengthen its capabilities in corporate law, financial regulation, and criminal litigation. This recruitment is part of Decent Law Firm’s broader strategy to provide more comprehensive legal support to corporate clients, building on its existing strengths in digital assets, startups, and international legal services. As legal issues faced by businesses in Korea increasingly involve fundraising, financial regulation, management disputes, and criminal risk, the firm aims to deliver more integrated and practical legal solutions. Attorney Park Jinwon graduated from Sungkyunkwan University with a degree in Global Business Administration and earned his J.D. from Chungbuk National University Law School. He has experience at the Commercial Legal Affairs Division of the Ministry of Justice and the Legal Advisory Committee under the Ministry of Justice, and has handled civil and criminal litigation as well as corporate advisory matters. Attorney Park has worked on legal reviews involving the Commercial Act and the Financial Investment Services and Capital Markets Act, provided advice to government ministries and public institutions, and handled corporate legal matters. He also has experience in a range of civil litigation matters, including insurance disputes, damages claims, and regional housing association disputes. Attorney Won Beomhee graduated from Hongik University with a degree in law and earned his J.D. from Konkuk University Law School. He has handled civil, criminal, and administrative cases, as well as legal advisory matters. In particular, Attorney Won has worked on major criminal cases involving narcotics and sex crimes, including early-stage investigation response, warrant review proceedings, and cases resulting in non-referral or non-prosecution. His experience in public-sector advisory work and administrative litigation further supports his practical capabilities in criminal defense and dispute resolution. Attorney Na Hyeonsu graduated from Yonsei University with a degree in Political Science and International Relations and earned her J.D. from Ewha Womans University Law School. She has worked at the KOSDAQ Disclosure Department of the Korea Exchange, where she handled key capital market matters including disclosures, securities issuances, additional listings, delisting procedures, and sanctions for disclosure violations. Attorney Na has reviewed corporate financing-related agreements, including share purchase agreements, share pledge agreements, convertible bonds, capital increases, and stock option matters. She has also handled regulatory issues involving backdoor listings, delisting responses, and disclosures related to management disputes, building practical experience in corporate finance and financial regulation. Through the recruitment of these three attorneys, Decent Law Firm plans to further strengthen its corporate law and financial regulatory practices while expanding its capabilities in corporate-related criminal matters and dispute resolution. Managing Partners Jin Hyeonsu and Hong Pureun of Decent Law Firm stated, “This recruitment is a strategic step to enhance our expertise across corporate law, financial regulation, criminal defense, and litigation. Together with our existing strengths in digital assets, startups, and international legal services, we will continue building a system capable of responding more comprehensively to our clients’ fundraising, regulatory, dispute, and investigation-related risks.”
2026-07-14 -
법률정보
Virtual Asset “Hwanchigi” in Korea: Penalties and Key Changes Under the 2026 Foreign Exchange Transactions Act
As cross-border transactions involving virtual assets and overseas payment services continue to increase, Korean regulators are paying closer attention to whether such transactions constitute unlicensed foreign exchange business or illegal remittance activities. The Korea Customs Service recently conducted targeted inspections of high-risk money exchange businesses and identified violations involving false transaction records, foreign currency sales exceeding statutory limits, and failures to report large cash transactions. The businesses selected for inspection also included entities suspected of using virtual assets for illegal cross-border remittances. A major regulatory change will take effect on December 3, 2026, when the amended Foreign Exchange Transactions Act comes into force. Under the amended Act, certain cross-border virtual asset transfer services will become subject to a separate registration requirement. Virtual asset service providers, payment companies, remittance operators, and businesses offering cross-border settlement services should review whether their current business models fall within the scope of the new registration regime. What Is “Hwanchigi” Under Korean Law? “Hwanchigi” is not a term expressly defined in the Foreign Exchange Transactions Act. It generally refers to an arrangement in which funds are transferred across borders without using a bank or another authorized foreign exchange institution. Instead, separate pools of funds or accounts in Korea and another country are used to produce the same economic effect as an international remittance. For example, a person in Korea may pay Korean won to a local operator, while the operator’s overseas partner pays an equivalent amount in foreign currency to the intended recipient abroad. The Korean won received in Korea is not physically transferred overseas. Nevertheless, because a corresponding payment is made abroad, the arrangement produces substantially the same result as an international remittance. Article 8 of the Foreign Exchange Transactions Act generally requires a person who engages in foreign exchange business as a commercial activity to obtain the necessary registration. A person may therefore be regarded as participating in foreign exchange business even if they did not personally send money overseas, provided that their role formed part of a broader structure designed to complete a cross-border payment. A Transaction May Be Regulated Even If No Foreign Currency Crosses the Border Under Korean foreign exchange law, the key issue is not whether the same cash or foreign currency physically crossed the border. What matters is whether payments made in Korea and abroad were connected in a manner that produced the same economic effect as a cross-border transfer. Common structures that may raise regulatory concerns include the following. ▪️ Korean Won Received in Korea and Foreign Currency Paid Overseas A Korean account receives the funds, while an overseas partner or local office pays foreign currency to the designated recipient abroad. ▪️ Funds Received Overseas and Korean Won Paid in Korea Foreign currency or local currency is received outside Korea, and Korean won is then paid into a designated Korean bank account. ▪️ Settlement Through Third-Party Accounts Funds are paid or received through accounts held by family members, employees, acquaintances, or unrelated business entities rather than the actual sender or recipient. ▪️ Offshore and Domestic Obligations Offset Against Each Other Amounts payable in Korea and abroad are offset, allowing the parties to settle without making a conventional international bank transfer. If these transactions are conducted repeatedly and the operator earns fees or profits from exchange-rate differences, the activity may be treated as unregistered foreign exchange business. Why the Supreme Court Treated Virtual Asset Arbitrage as Foreign Exchange Business In its September 4, 2025 decision, Supreme Court Case No. 2024Do16540, the Court confirmed that a transaction may constitute foreign exchange business even where no foreign currency was directly transferred across the border. In that case, the defendant received virtual assets from a non-resident located overseas, sold them through a Korean virtual asset exchange, and transferred the proceeds in Korean won to multiple domestic bank accounts designated by the non-resident. The defendant did not personally remit foreign currency overseas. Nevertheless, the Supreme Court upheld the lower court’s finding that the transaction performed substantially the same function as an inbound remittance service, in which a Korean foreign exchange bank pays Korean won to a domestic recipient based on payment instructions from a foreign bank. The relevant question was therefore not simply whether the defendant had directly sent funds abroad. The Court examined whether the overall transaction structure effectively facilitated payments between Korea and another country. However, the sale of virtual assets followed by a domestic Korean won transfer does not automatically constitute unregistered foreign exchange business in every case. The following factors should be considered together: ▪️ The purpose and background of the transaction ▪️ The size and frequency of the transactions ▪️ The duration and degree of repetition ▪️ Whether fees or exchange-rate profits were earned ▪️ Whether the activity was conducted as a business Can Virtual Assets and Overseas Payment Services Be Treated as Hwanchigi? The use of virtual assets or overseas payment services does not, by itself, exclude a transaction from the application of Korean foreign exchange laws. ▪️ Receiving Korean Won and Sending Virtual Assets to an Overseas Wallet Where Korean won is received in Korea and Bitcoin, USDT, or another virtual asset is sent to an overseas recipient in return, the transaction may be treated as a cross-border payment service rather than a simple virtual asset sale. ▪️ Receiving Virtual Assets Overseas and Paying Korean Won in Korea A transaction may also be treated as cross-border payment activity where virtual assets received from overseas are sold in Korea and the proceeds are paid into domestic accounts designated by the overseas party. ▪️ Settling Funds Through WeChat Pay or Alipay Regulatory concerns may arise where Korean won is received in Korea and an overseas payment account is funded abroad, or where funds are received overseas and Korean won is paid to a recipient in Korea. These transactions are not automatically illegal. The authorities will generally examine: ▪️ Whether the domestic payment corresponded to an overseas payment ▪️ Whether third-party accounts were used ▪️ Whether the activity was repeated ▪️ Whether the operator earned fees or exchange-rate profits ▪️ Whether the transaction was conducted for a commercial purpose Key Changes Under the 2026 Amendment to the Foreign Exchange Transactions Act The amended Foreign Exchange Transactions Act was promulgated on June 2, 2026 and will take effect on December 3, 2026. The amendment introduces three major changes. ▪️ Registration Requirement for Cross-Border Virtual Asset Transfer Services A virtual asset service provider that uses virtual asset sales, purchases, or exchanges to transfer value between Korea and another country, or to produce substantially the same effect, will be required to register with the Minister of Economy and Finance. A virtual asset service provider registration under the Act on Reporting and Using Specified Financial Transaction Information may not be sufficient by itself. A separate registration under the Foreign Exchange Transactions Act may be required where the business provides cross-border virtual asset transfer services. ▪️ Stronger Administrative Sanctions for Operating Outside the Registered Scope A specialized foreign exchange business operator that conducts foreign exchange activities outside its registered scope may be subject to: ▪️ Cancellation of registration ▪️ Business restrictions ▪️ Suspension of business ▪️ Administrative surcharges imposed in place of certain suspension measures Businesses should therefore confirm that their actual services remain within the scope of their registration. ▪️ Criminal Penalties for Unregistered Business and Certain Payment Procedure Violations A person who conducts cross-border virtual asset transfer business without registration may be subject to: ▪️ Imprisonment for up to three years ▪️ A fine of up to KRW 300 million The amended Act also introduces criminal penalties of: ▪️ Imprisonment for up to one year ▪️ A fine of up to KRW 100 million These penalties may apply where a person violates prescribed payment procedures for the purpose of obtaining an improper financial benefit for themselves or another person. The amendment does more than simply clarify which businesses must register. It expressly brings cross-border virtual asset transfer services within the registration framework and clarifies the scope of criminal liability for unregistered activities and certain payment procedure violations. The Substance of the Fund Flow Matters More Than the Name of the Transaction Virtual asset-based hwanchigi and arbitrage cases are primarily governed by the Foreign Exchange Transactions Act. Depending on the transaction structure, the following laws may also apply: ▪️ The Act on Reporting and Using Specified Financial Transaction Information ▪️ The Virtual Asset User Protection Act ▪️ Other criminal and financial regulations related to money laundering, fraud, or unlawful fund transfers Businesses and individuals should review the entire flow of funds, including: ▪️ The roles of the parties ▪️ Domestic and overseas bank transactions ▪️ Wallet transfers and transaction records ▪️ Fee and exchange-rate arrangements ▪️ The frequency and commercial nature of the activity Decent Law Firm’s Virtual Asset Practice Group advises clients on investigations involving alleged violations of the Foreign Exchange Transactions Act and virtual asset-based remittance activities. We also assist virtual asset businesses, payment providers, and cross-border settlement operators in assessing whether their services are subject to registration under the amended Act. Where the Korea Customs Service or the police requests attendance or submission of documents, or where a business needs to determine whether its services fall within the amended regulatory framework, the transaction structure and supporting records should be reviewed before responding. This publication is provided for general informational purposes only and does not constitute legal advice for any specific matter.
2026-07-13 -
법률정보
DUI Traffic Stops in Korea: Penalties and Key Legal Issues at the Scene
As public concern over drunk driving continues to grow in Korea, law enforcement agencies are applying DUI laws and enforcement standards more strictly. Many foreign residents and visitors are aware that blood alcohol concentration, or BAC, is the primary factor in a DUI case. However, statements made at the scene, the driver’s conduct during testing, and the circumstances surrounding the driving may also be reviewed during the investigation and court proceedings. This article explains the penalties for drunk driving under Korean law and the legal significance of how a driver responds during and immediately after a traffic stop. DUI Penalties Under Korean Law Article 148-2 of the Korean Road Traffic Act sets different criminal penalties depending on the driver’s BAC level. Category Blood Alcohol Concentration Criminal Penalty Level 1 0.03% to less than 0.08% Imprisonment for up to 1 year or a fine of up to KRW 5 million Level 2 0.08% to less than 0.2% Imprisonment for 1 to 2 years or a fine of KRW 5 million to KRW 10 million Level 3 0.2% or higher Imprisonment for 2 to 5 years or a fine of KRW 10 million to KRW 20 million Refusal to Submit to Testing Refusal without a legally valid reason Imprisonment for 1 to 5 years or a fine of KRW 5 million to KRW 20 million Source: Article 148-2 of the Korean Road Traffic Act These are the general statutory ranges. A person who commits another DUI-related offense within 10 years after a previous DUI, test-refusal, or test-interference conviction may be subject to aggravated penalties. Administrative sanctions may also be imposed separately from criminal penalties. A BAC of 0.03% to less than 0.08% generally results in a driver’s license suspension, while a BAC of 0.08% or higher generally results in license revocation. License revocation may also apply where drunk driving causes bodily injury or death. The precise administrative measure may vary depending on the circumstances and the standards prescribed by the Enforcement Rule of the Road Traffic Act. How Korean Courts Assess BAC and Conduct at the Scene Where there is a time gap between the driving and the BAC test, the Supreme Court of Korea has held that the driver’s BAC at the time of driving must be assessed by considering the surrounding circumstances as a whole. “The determination must be made reasonably, in accordance with logic and common experience, by comprehensively considering factors established by the evidence, including the time interval between driving and testing, the difference between the measured blood alcohol concentration and the statutory threshold, the duration and amount of drinking, the driver’s conduct at the time of the traffic stop and testing, and, where a traffic accident occurred, the circumstances surrounding the accident.” — Supreme Court of Korea, Decision 2013Do6285, October 24, 2013 This means that the measured BAC is not always considered in isolation. The driver’s behavior, statements, drinking history, timing of the test, and any accident-related circumstances may also be taken into account. Statements made at the scene may therefore become evidence regarding how and why the person drove. An explanation intended to minimize the incident may later be interpreted as an admission that the person knowingly chose to drive after drinking. Key Legal Issues After a DUI Traffic Stop ▪️Statements Made at the Scene A written or verbal statement may be used to establish the driving circumstances, distance traveled, reason for driving, and the driver’s awareness of the situation. Expressions such as “I only drove a short distance” or “I was just moving the car” may not necessarily reduce liability. Depending on the context, they may instead confirm that the person voluntarily operated the vehicle after drinking. ▪️Legality of the Testing Procedure The time of testing, the method used, whether a second test was requested or conducted, and whether the applicable procedures were followed may require legal review. A procedural issue does not automatically invalidate a BAC result, but the accuracy and admissibility of the evidence should be assessed based on the specific facts. ▪️Involvement in a Traffic Accident The consequences may differ significantly depending on whether the incident involved only property damage, bodily injury, or death. An accident may lead to additional criminal charges, increased sentencing exposure, and more severe administrative penalties. ▪️Refusal to Submit to Testing Refusing a lawful breath test without a valid reason does not generally provide a legal advantage. Under Article 148-2 of the Road Traffic Act, refusal may result in imprisonment for 1 to 5 years or a fine of KRW 5 million to KRW 20 million. A driver should therefore avoid making an impulsive decision to refuse testing and should seek legal advice regarding any procedural concerns. Why Legal Advice May Still Matter After Testing Some drivers assume that there is no reason to contact a lawyer once a BAC test has already been completed. The BAC result is a central piece of evidence, but the case does not end with the test. Statements concerning the driving distance, reason for driving, drinking timeline, accident circumstances, and post-incident conduct may affect the investigation, charging decision, sentencing, and administrative proceedings. Early legal review can help clarify what evidence has already been created, identify procedural issues, prepare for questioning, and organize relevant sentencing materials. 24/7 DUI Response by Decent Law Firm’s Criminal Defense Team Decent Law Firm’s Criminal Defense Team assists clients from the initial traffic stop and police investigation through criminal proceedings and sentencing preparation. Our team provides 24-hour consultations and, where necessary, on-site assistance for urgent criminal matters. We also assist foreign clients in understanding Korean investigative procedures and preparing for police questioning. Those currently at a DUI checkpoint or scheduled for questioning should obtain legal advice before making additional statements or submitting further documents. This content is provided for general informational purposes only and does not constitute legal advice for any individual case.
2026-07-10
