The Korean Supreme Court ruled that installing computers in a call center operated by a fraud organization does not constitute aiding and abetting fraud. The ruling implies that even if circumstances raised doubts about the legality of the call center business, the court must separately examine whether the individual “knew of” and “aided” the specific fraudulent acts. Thus, mere suspicion that your product or service can be used in a fraud is not adequate to establish fraud.

The First Criminal Division of the Supreme Court of Korea (presiding Justice Cheon Dae-yeop ) overturned the original ruling sentencing the Defendant to two years in prison suspended for three years and ordering the confiscation of 5.52 million won on September 3, 2026, and remanded the case to the Suwon High Court ( 2026do8994 ).

Facts

  1. At the request of Mr. B, whom he had known since middle school, Defendant installed computer equipment and managed the office relocation work at a call center office in Siheung, Gyeonggi Province from November 2024 to May 2025.
  2. Mr. B was indicted on charges of embezzling a total of 425.92 million won from 11 victims by deceiving them into believing they could buy initial public offering shares scheduled to be listed on the KOSDAQ market at a low price. The arrangement was a phishing scam.
  3. The prosecution charged the Defendant with fraud and membership in a criminal organization, based on the finding that he aided the crime by installing and moving equipment despite knowing about the fraud.
  4. The court of first instance sentenced the Defendant to two years in prison (suspended for three years – thus no time served in jail) and ordered the confiscation of 5.52 million won. The court found the Defendant not guilty of charges including fraud and joining and engaging in a criminal organization. The court noted that there was no evidence that he received payment only for computer installation and relocation, or that he contacted other members of the organization or knew the specific details of the crime.
  5. The appellate court held that Defendant was aware, at least indirectly, of the computer-based fraud and dismissed both the Defendant’s and the Prosecutor’s appeals.

Supreme Court Ruling (Summary)

The Supreme Court of Korea remanded the case, holding that the Prosecution has not proven the intent necessary for the crime. The Court ruled, in short, that Defendant did not contribute to B’s crime beyond the computer installation and did not receive any additional proceeds of crime under any pretext other than the installation fee.

“There is a strong possibility that [Defendant’s] ordinary business activities were merely used for the crimes committed by B and others, and it is difficult to conclude that A contributed to the specific crimes or that a causal relationship, such as a close connection between A’s actions and the realization of the principal offender’s crime, is recognized.

About the Author

Sean Hayes is a former law professor and the first non-Korean to work for the Korean courts. He is one of the most widely cited foreign attorneys on Korean law and has been quoted in numerous international publications on Korean legal developments. Attorney Hayes advises multinational corporations, investors, and executives on Korean litigation, regulatory matters, criminal law, labor law, and cross-border disputes.

You may schedule an initial free consultation with our Attorney at: Schedule a Call with an Attorney