Pureun “Ian” Hong
MP ian@decentlaw.ioIan served as criminal law expert at YK Lawfirm, handling various corporate litigations including private fund investments, STOs, and capital markets.
- Criminal
- Class Action
- Crypto
- Real Estate Disputes · Construction
- Entertainment
성공사례
관련소식
-
법률칼럼Police Request to Appear by Phone in Korea: What to Check Before a Suspect Interview
If you receive a call from the police asking you to appear for questioning, one of the first things to confirm is whether you are being contacted as a criminal suspect or as a witness or other person involved in the case. A police request to appear does not always arrive as a written notice. Under Korea’s current investigation rules, a written request is generally used, but a request may also be made by phone, text message, or another appropriate method where prompt contact is necessary or other circumstances justify doing so. The current rules took effect on July 1, 2026. Rather than ignoring the call or immediately discussing the substance of the case, it is important to first identify the case involved, your procedural status, the investigating officer, and the proposed interview schedule. Can the Police Ask You to Appear by Phone? Yes. A police request to appear may be made by phone or text message in certain circumstances. Article 200 of the Criminal Procedure Act provides the legal basis for requesting a criminal suspect to appear for questioning where necessary for an investigation. The specific method of requesting an appearance is governed by Article 19 of the Regulation on Mutual Cooperation Between Prosecutors and Judicial Police Officers and General Rules for Investigation. As a general rule, a written request stating the purpose of the appearance, including the substance of the suspected offense, should be sent. However, where prompt contact is required or other unavoidable circumstances exist, the request may instead be made by telephone, text message, or another appropriate method. Accordingly, a police call should not be disregarded simply because no written notice has been received. The more important first step is to identify which police station and officer are handling the matter, what case the request concerns, and in what capacity you are being asked to appear. Why Should You First Confirm Whether You Are a Suspect? Because your legal position and the purpose of the interview differ depending on whether you are a suspect or a person being questioned in connection with someone else’s case. A criminal suspect is a person who is under investigation for a suspected criminal offense. Article 200 of the Criminal Procedure Act governs requests for a suspect to appear for questioning. By contrast, Article 221 permits investigators to request the appearance of a person other than the suspect where his or her statement is necessary for an investigation. This may include a victim, witness, or another person connected to the case. The fact that both may receive a call asking them to come to a police station does not mean their procedural positions are the same. If you are being questioned as a suspect, the police may ask questions directly concerning the alleged offense, and statements made during the interview may become important evidence as the investigation proceeds. Before interrogating a suspect, investigators must also inform the suspect of certain rights, including the right to remain silent and the right to assistance of counsel, as provided under Article 244-3 of the Criminal Procedure Act. For this reason, if you receive a request to appear, it is generally advisable to first determine your procedural status and the nature of the case before giving a lengthy explanation of your position over the phone. What Should You Check When the Police Call? After confirming whether you are a suspect, you should identify the basic information necessary to understand and prepare for the investigation. You will not necessarily be given access over the phone to the complainant’s statements, evidence collected by investigators, or the complete investigation record. However, you should generally try to identify the basic circumstances of the request before simply agreeing to an interview date. What to Check Why It Matters Police station, division, and investigating officer Confirms the investigating authority and contact details Whether you are a suspect or another person involved Clarifies your procedural status Case or alleged offense involved Helps identify the subject of the investigation Date, time, and place of interview Allows you to prepare and coordinate your schedule Whether a written request has been or will be sent Allows you to review any information provided in writing If the call itself appears suspicious, you may verify the officer and department through the police station’s official contact information rather than relying solely on the telephone number provided by the caller. Can You Ask to Change the Interview Date? Yes. If you have a legitimate scheduling issue, you may ask the investigating officer to adjust the date and time. Article 19 of the investigation rules requires investigators to provide sufficient time when requesting a suspect’s appearance so as not to unnecessarily interfere with the suspect’s livelihood. The rules also provide for coordination of the interview date and place and, absent special circumstances, adjustment of the date where the suspect requests a postponement. Accordingly, if you cannot attend because of work, travel, or another legitimate reason, it is generally preferable to explain the situation to the investigating officer in advance and arrange another date. This should be distinguished from simply ignoring the request. Under Article 200-2 of the Criminal Procedure Act, where there are reasonable grounds to suspect that a person committed an offense and the suspect fails to comply with a request to appear without justifiable cause, or there is reason to believe the suspect will not comply, an arrest warrant may become an issue if the statutory requirements are otherwise met. This does not mean that missing a single requested appearance automatically results in arrest. The relevant circumstances and statutory requirements must be considered. What Should You Prepare Before a Police Interview as a Suspect? If you have confirmed that you are being investigated as a suspect, you should review the relevant facts and objective evidence before the interview. A useful starting point is to organize the events chronologically and distinguish between: the conduct or facts being questioned by the police; what actually happened and in what sequence; your role and actions; objective evidence such as contracts, bank records, transfers, emails, or messages; points on which the other party’s account differs from yours; and matters that may require further explanation. For example, if the case concerns money or a contractual relationship, relevant agreements, bank records, and payment records should be reviewed together. If messages or online communications are at issue, individual statements should generally be considered together with the surrounding conversation and context rather than in isolation. You should also avoid guessing when your memory is unclear or altering or deleting existing materials in an attempt to prepare for questioning. Under Article 243-2 of the Criminal Procedure Act, a suspect may request the participation of defense counsel during interrogation, and counsel must generally be permitted to participate unless there is good cause to restrict participation. The official English translation refers to Article 243-2 as “Defense Counsel’s Participation.” Where the allegations are disputed, the parties provide materially different accounts, or the case involves extensive documents or transaction records, reviewing the facts and key legal issues before the first interview can be particularly important. Frequently Asked Questions (FAQ) Q1. How can I verify that the person calling me is actually a police officer? You can contact the relevant police station through its official contact information and confirm the officer’s name and department. Particular caution is warranted if someone claiming to be an investigator asks you to install an application, transfer money, or take other unusual financial actions. Q2. What if the police will not explain the case in detail over the phone? You should not expect the complete investigation record or all evidence collected by investigators to be disclosed during an initial phone call. However, you may ask for basic information necessary to understand the request, including whether you are being contacted as a suspect and what case or alleged conduct the interview concerns. Q3. Do I need to explain my position on the case during the initial phone call? No. A call made to arrange your appearance does not ordinarily require you to provide a complete substantive statement about the case. If you are a suspect, it may be preferable to first understand the allegations and review the relevant records rather than giving an extended account based solely on memory before the formal interview. Q4. Can a lawyer accompany me to a police interview? Yes. A criminal suspect may request the participation of defense counsel during police questioning. Article 243-2 of the Criminal Procedure Act provides that, upon a qualifying request, defense counsel should be permitted to participate in the interrogation unless there is good cause otherwise. Preparing Before a Police Interview Can Be Critical A police request to appear may be made in writing or, in certain circumstances, by telephone or text message. If you receive such a request, first determine whether you are being investigated as a suspect, what case the request concerns, who the investigating officer is, and when and where the interview is scheduled. If you are a suspect, it is important to review the sequence of events and relevant evidence before the first interview and identify any factual or legal issues that may require careful explanation. Decent Law Firm assists clients in criminal investigations by reviewing the relevant facts and evidence, identifying key issues before police questioning, and providing legal representation during suspect interviews.
2026-09-01 -
법률칼럼
Traffic Accident Settlement Agreements: Why the Settlement Amount and Non-Punishment Statement Matter
1. Do You Always Need a Criminal Settlement with the Victim After a Traffic Accident? Not every traffic accident requires a separate criminal settlement with the victim. Article 3(2) of the Act on Special Cases Concerning the Settlement of Traffic Accidents provides that, in principle, a driver cannot be prosecuted against the victim's express wishes for causing injury through occupational negligence or gross negligence in a traffic accident. Article 4 of the same Act also provides that, in principle, prosecution is barred where the vehicle is covered by qualifying insurance or a mutual aid program that meets certain requirements. As a result, for an ordinary traffic accident, depending on the type of accident and whether comprehensive insurance applies, the criminal process may be resolved through insurance handling without a separate criminal settlement. However, there is an important exception. If the accident involved a serious violation specified in the proviso to Article 3(2) — such as running a red light or crossing the centerline — or falls under another statutory exception such as fleeing the scene without taking necessary measures, prosecution may proceed even if the victim does not wish to see the driver punished. So before asking "do I need to settle with the victim?", a suspect should first check what type of case the investigation is treating this as. 2. Do You Still Need a Separate Settlement Even If Insurance Already Paid Compensation? Because compensation through an insurer and settlement in a criminal case serve different purposes, having gone through insurance processing does not automatically mean a criminal settlement is unnecessary. Auto insurance is primarily meant to compensate civil damages arising from the accident — medical expenses, lost income, and pain and suffering. A criminal settlement, by contrast, is the process in which, while criminal proceedings are ongoing, the suspect pays a separate sum to help the victim recover from the harm and confirms whether the victim wishes to forgo punishment. How Insurance Claims and a Criminal Settlement Differ Category Auto Insurance Claim Criminal Settlement Main Purpose Civil compensation for damages Recovery from harm in the criminal case Who Pays Insurer / mutual aid association The suspect or defendant Main Content Medical costs, lost income, pain and suffering, etc. Settlement amount, non-punishment statement, etc. Relationship to Criminal Proceedings For certain accidents, having insurance itself relates to the special prosecution bar May affect whether charges are filed or the sentence, depending on the type of accident What to Check Insurance coverage and scope of compensation Scope of settlement, nature of the settlement amount, non-punishment statement In particular, Article 4 of the Act on Special Cases Concerning the Settlement of Traffic Accidents carves out an exception to the prosecution bar for insured vehicles where the accident falls under the proviso to Article 3(2), or where the victim suffers a life-threatening injury or an incurable or intractable disease. So the mere fact that the insurer is already paying medical costs does not mean the response to the criminal case is complete. The cause and extent of the accident, together with whether insurance applies, should be reviewed together to determine whether a separate criminal settlement is needed. 3. What Should You Check in a Traffic Accident Settlement Agreement? For a traffic accident settlement agreement, what matters is not the template itself but making clear what accident the payment relates to, how much is being paid, and exactly what scope the parties have agreed on. Some people simply search online for a settlement agreement template and use it as is, but because the reasons a criminal settlement is needed and the insurance situation differ from case to case, using identical wording across cases may not be appropriate. First, the agreement should clearly identify which accident it concerns. It should record the date, time, and location of the accident and the parties involved, and if the case has already been reported to the police, information that can identify the case should be organized as well. Next, the settlement amount and the method of payment should be clearly specified. If the amount has already been paid, records such as bank transfer history that confirm payment should be kept; if payment is scheduled for later, a specific payment deadline should be set. Another important element is the character of the settlement amount. The Supreme Court has taken the position that, absent special circumstances, where a victim in a criminal case receives a settlement amount from the offender and agrees not to seek punishment, that amount is treated as part of the compensation for the victim's property damage. So if compensation through the insurer is proceeding separately, it is worth reviewing what purpose the criminal settlement amount serves and how the agreement addresses its relationship to civil compensation. Finally, what matters most for a suspect is whether the victim's non-punishment intent is actually confirmed. Simply stating that the parties "reached an amicable settlement" or that the victim "received the settlement amount" does not always make clear that the victim does not wish to see the suspect punished. 4. Why Do the Settlement Amount and the Non-Punishment Statement Matter? In a criminal settlement, the fact that a settlement amount was paid and the victim's intent not to seek punishment are separate issues, so it is important to address both together. The Settlement Amount Can Show Real Recovery from the Harm There is no fixed statutory amount for a criminal settlement based on the type of accident. The amount is negotiated between the parties based on individual circumstances, including the severity of the victim's injury, the length of treatment, how the accident occurred, and how much of the harm has already been recovered through insurance. The Supreme Court Sentencing Commission's current sentencing guidelines for traffic offenses also treat "non-punishment intent or substantial recovery from the harm" as a major mitigating factor. These guidelines were revised on March 30, 2026 and have been in effect since July 1, 2026. So if there is a possibility of criminal punishment for a traffic accident, it is worth preparing not only proof that a settlement amount was paid but also evidence of how much of the harm has actually been recovered. A Settlement Agreement and a Non-Punishment Statement Are Not the Same Document A settlement agreement is the document in which the suspect and the victim confirm the settlement amount and the terms of settlement. A non-punishment statement, on the other hand, is a separate document in which the victim clearly expresses that they do not wish to see the suspect punished — its purpose is different. Article 3(2) of the Act on Special Cases Concerning the Settlement of Traffic Accidents is based on the victim's "express intent." So the mere fact that the suspect transferred a settlement amount to the victim does not automatically establish that the victim does not wish to see the suspect punished. If the settlement agreement itself clearly states that the victim does not wish to see the suspect punished, it cannot be said that a separate non-punishment statement is always required for that intent to be validly expressed. Still, because it is important in criminal proceedings to clearly confirm the victim's intent, in practice it matters to record the terms of the settlement and the non-punishment intent through a reliable separate document, such as a non-punishment statement. Timing Matters for the Non-Punishment Statement In an offense where prosecution is barred if the victim objects, there is also a time limit on withdrawing the victim's wish for punishment. Under Article 232(1) and (3) of the Criminal Procedure Act, in a case where prosecution cannot proceed against the victim's express wishes, withdrawing the wish for punishment is possible only before the first-instance judgment is rendered. So in a case that has already gone from a police investigation to trial, rather than simply thinking "we can settle at some point," the current stage of the proceedings and the timing of any settlement should be considered together. 5. How Does the Effect of a Settlement Differ for the 12 Major Traffic Offenses or Cases Involving Serious Injury? Whether a case involves one of the 12 major traffic offenses or an ordinary traffic accident with serious injury can change the legal significance of a victim's settlement and non-punishment intent. First, if the accident falls under the proviso to Article 3(2) of the Act on Special Cases Concerning the Settlement of Traffic Accidents — such as running a red light, crossing the centerline, or violating a pedestrian's right of way at a crosswalk — the victim's wish not to see the driver punished does not have the effect of barring prosecution. In other words, settling with the victim in a case involving one of the 12 major traffic offenses does not automatically end the investigation or trial. That said, this does not mean a criminal settlement is meaningless. Because the current sentencing guidelines for traffic offenses treat non-punishment intent or substantial recovery from the harm as a positive sentencing factor, recovery from the harm and whether a settlement was reached can still be considered in determining the sentence. On the other hand, for an accident involving serious injury under Article 4(1)(2) of the Act, being covered by comprehensive insurance alone does not restrict prosecution. However, if the accident does not fall under the proviso to Article 3(2), the victim's express non-punishment intent regarding occupational-negligence injury and similar charges may still be a separate issue, so it should not be assumed that a serious-injury case will always continue regardless of settlement. Also, cases involving a fatality, fleeing the scene, drunk driving, or other charges under separate statutes may be governed by different rules. So a suspect should check their case in this order: type of accident → applicable charges → whether insurance applies → extent of harm → the effect of settlement and non-punishment intent. 6. Frequently Asked Questions (FAQ) Q1. Do I Still Need a Criminal Settlement If Comprehensive Insurance Is Already Covering All the Medical Costs? It depends on the type of accident. For an ordinary traffic accident, the special protection under comprehensive insurance may apply, but if the case falls under an exception such as one of the 12 major traffic offenses or a statutorily defined serious injury, having insurance alone may not resolve the criminal proceedings. So you should first check what charge the police are investigating, not just whether insurance is being processed. Q2. Do I Have to Pay Whatever Settlement Amount the Victim Demands? You are not legally required to pay exactly the amount the victim proposes. There is no fixed statutory amount for a criminal settlement in a traffic accident; the amount is negotiated between the parties based on the extent of the harm, the length of treatment, how the accident occurred, and how much has already been recovered through insurance. That said, in a case with a real possibility of criminal punishment, it is worth considering not just how large or small the amount is, but what recovering the harm through settlement actually means for the case. Q3. What Should I Do If the Victim Refuses to Settle? A victim cannot be forced to settle. If the victim does not respond to settlement, it is worth objectively organizing how much of the harm has been recovered through insurance and what efforts the suspect made toward a settlement. Because the outcome of a criminal case is not determined by settlement alone, other sentencing factors — how the accident occurred, the degree of negligence, the extent of harm, and any criminal record — should be prepared as well. 7. Summary and Key Takeaways Not every suspect in a traffic accident case needs a separate criminal settlement with the victim. But if a criminal settlement is needed, it matters more to check that the character and scope of the settlement amount and the victim's non-punishment intent are clearly confirmed than simply to use a generic settlement agreement template. In particular, in cases involving the 12 major traffic offenses, proceedings may continue even with a non-punishment statement, while in other types of traffic accidents the victim's express non-punishment intent can carry significant weight in whether charges are filed — so it is important to first identify which category the accident falls into. Decent Law Firm reviews the dashcam footage, the circumstances of the accident, the victim's medical records, and the status of insurance processing to assess the applicable charges and the need for a criminal settlement from a professional perspective. You can also work with attorneys experienced in numerous traffic accident settlements to review the settlement process, the settlement agreement and non-punishment statement, and the response needed at the police investigation and trial stages. If you are facing a police investigation, or are already discussing settlement with the victim, it is best to first check what legal significance a settlement actually has in your case, rather than deciding on the settlement amount first.
2026-08-28 -
법률칼럼
Crypto Transfers to Self-Hosted Wallets: What Changes Under Korea’s Travel Rule in 2027?
Transfers from a Korean crypto exchange to a self-hosted wallet (personal wallet) such as MetaMask are not currently treated in the same way as Travel Rule transfers between virtual asset service providers (VASPs). However, following the August 2026 amendment to the Enforcement Decree of the Act on Reporting and Using Specified Financial Transaction Information, Korea will strengthen its AML requirements for virtual asset transfers. From February 19, 2027, the KRW 1 million threshold for the Travel Rule will be removed, and transactions involving overseas VASPs and self-hosted wallets will also become subject to separate risk-based AML requirements. For self-hosted wallet transactions, factors such as who actually owns or controls the wallet, whether the sender and recipient are the same person, the purpose of the transaction, and the flow of funds will become increasingly important. Does the Travel Rule Apply to Transfers to Self-Hosted Wallets? A transfer to a self-hosted wallet is not currently treated in the same way as a Travel Rule transfer between VASPs. Under Korea’s current Travel Rule framework, when a VASP transfers virtual assets worth KRW 1 million or more to another VASP, specified information regarding the sender and recipient must be provided. A self-hosted wallet such as MetaMask, however, is controlled directly by the user and is not itself a Korean VASP. Accordingly, withdrawals to self-hosted wallets should be reviewed not only from a Travel Rule perspective but also in light of the exchange’s AML obligations and wallet verification policies. Depending on the exchange, users may already be required to register a wallet address or verify ownership before making a withdrawal. Official Legislation Enforcement Decree of the Act on Reporting and Using Specified Financial Transaction Information What Will Change for Self-Hosted Wallet Transactions in 2027? From February 19, 2027, virtual asset transfers involving self-hosted wallets will become subject to enhanced risk-based AML controls. The amended Enforcement Decree expands the obligations imposed on VASPs in connection with virtual asset transfers. The Financial Services Commission (FSC) has outlined the following regulatory approach. 🔹 Self-Hosted Wallet and Overseas VASP Transactions from 2027 Transaction Type Expected Regulatory Approach Low-risk overseas VASP Virtual asset transfers generally permitted Other overseas VASPs Generally permitted where the sender and recipient are the same person Self-hosted wallet Generally permitted where the sender and recipient are the same person High-risk transaction Transfer may be restricted or prohibited Transactions of KRW 10 million or more involving overseas VASPs or self-hosted wallets A separate suspicious transaction monitoring framework must be established and operated Accordingly, a withdrawal to a wallet controlled by the customer may be treated differently from a direct withdrawal to a wallet controlled by a third party. However, the detailed risk-assessment standards and implementation methods will need to be reviewed together with the relevant KoFIU regulations and the policies of individual exchanges. Official Source Financial Services Commission – August 11, 2026 What About Deposits from a Self-Hosted Wallet to a Korean Exchange? Deposits from a self-hosted wallet to a Korean exchange may also be subject to review. The amended framework covers transactions in which a VASP transfers virtual assets to, or receives virtual assets from, a self-hosted wallet. Accordingly, when virtual assets are deposited from a self-hosted wallet into a Korean exchange, factors such as the actual wallet owner, the source of funds, and the purpose of the transaction may become important. Where assets are repeatedly deposited from multiple wallets, it is advisable to retain transaction records showing the source and movement of the assets. Can the Travel Rule Be Avoided by Splitting Transfers Below KRW 1 Million? No. Splitting transfers into amounts below KRW 1 million does not place the transactions outside AML scrutiny. The current Travel Rule threshold for VASP-to-VASP transfers is KRW 1 million. From February 19, 2027, this threshold will be removed and the Travel Rule will apply regardless of the transfer amount. Even under the current framework, transactions below KRW 1 million are not automatically excluded from AML monitoring. The FSC has cited a case involving approximately KRW 200 million in virtual assets that was withdrawn through 216 separate transactions below KRW 1 million as an example of activity potentially intended to circumvent regulatory controls. Accordingly, factors such as repeated split transfers, wallet ownership, the source and movement of funds, and the purpose of the transaction may also be reviewed. Frequently Asked Questions (FAQ) Q1. Does the Travel Rule apply when I withdraw crypto to MetaMask? Not in the same manner as a transfer between two registered Korean VASPs under the current framework. However, exchange-specific wallet verification and AML requirements may still apply. From February 19, 2027, self-hosted wallet transactions will also become subject to enhanced risk-based AML controls. Q2. Can I withdraw less than KRW 1 million to a self-hosted wallet without restrictions? A transaction below KRW 1 million is not automatically excluded from AML monitoring. Repeated small withdrawals or transactions involving multiple wallets may still be reviewed based on the overall transaction pattern. In addition, the KRW 1 million Travel Rule threshold between VASPs will be removed from February 19, 2027. Q3. Will transfers to another person’s self-hosted wallet be prohibited? Not necessarily. A blanket prohibition on all transfers to third-party wallets has not been established. However, the Financial Services Commission has indicated that transactions involving self-hosted wallets will generally be permitted where the sender and recipient are the same person. The detailed scope of permitted transactions and exceptions will depend on implementing regulations and individual exchange policies. Q4. Will deposits from a self-hosted wallet to a Korean exchange also be subject to enhanced controls? Yes. The new framework applies not only to withdrawals but also to situations where a VASP receives virtual assets from a self-hosted wallet. The exchange may therefore review wallet ownership, transaction history, source of funds, and the purpose of the transfer. Q5. Does a transaction of KRW 10 million or more automatically trigger a Suspicious Transaction Report (STR)? No. A transaction does not automatically become reportable solely because it exceeds KRW 10 million. The announced framework requires VASPs to establish and operate a separate monitoring system for transactions of KRW 10 million or more involving overseas exchanges or self-hosted wallets. Whether an STR is ultimately required depends on the specific circumstances, including the source of funds, transaction purpose, transaction pattern, and counterparty. Prepare for the New Self-Hosted Wallet Rules Before February 2027 From February 19, 2027, Korea’s Travel Rule will apply to all transfers between VASPs regardless of amount, while risk-based AML controls for transactions involving self-hosted wallets and overseas VASPs will also be strengthened. For self-hosted wallet transactions, actual wallet ownership and control, whether the sender and recipient are the same person, the purpose of the transaction, and the flow of funds may become increasingly important. Businesses that use self-hosted wallets or overseas exchanges for recurring payments, transfers, or settlement should review their transaction structures and applicable regulatory requirements before the new rules take effect. Decent Law Firm advises clients on Korean virtual asset regulations, self-hosted wallet and overseas VASP transactions, Travel Rule compliance, and AML obligations under the Act on Reporting and Using Specified Financial Transaction Information.
2026-08-28
