Voice Phishing Crimes and the Scope of Punishment
A voice phishing scam is a telecommunications-based financial fraud in which victims are deceived over the phone or through messaging apps and tricked into handing over money. What is worth noting is that punishment is not limited to the ringleaders or core members of the organization. People who are involved in only one part of the scheme—cash collectors, money couriers, those who lend out their bank accounts, and operators of relay devices (SIM boxes)—are also being punished severely. In fact, these minor-participation cases are the very type most frequently handled in investigations and trials.
Applicable Laws and the Level of Punishment
Anyone who takes part in a voice phishing scam is, as a baseline, subject to the crime of fraud under Article 347 of the Korean Criminal Act, which carries imprisonment of up to 10 years or a criminal fine of up to KRW 20 million. If the amount of damage exceeds KRW 500 million, the Act on the Aggravated Punishment of Specific Economic Crimes applies and the sentence is significantly increased.
On top of this, the Telecommunications Fraud Refund Act (the Special Act on the Prevention of Loss Caused by Telecommunications-Based Financial Fraud and Refund of Fraud Money, 통신사기피해환급법) contains separate provisions punishing telecommunications-based financial fraud, so the very acts of transferring, withdrawing, or delivering money become independent grounds for punishment.
Where a person lends out a bankbook or check card, a violation of the Electronic Financial Transactions Act comes into play. Transferring or lending out an access medium is in itself punishable by imprisonment of up to 3 years or a criminal fine of up to KRW 20 million, and the punishment becomes heavier if compensation was received.
Why "I Didn't Know" Arguments Don't Work
The most common defense in cash collector cases is that "I thought it was a legitimate part-time job." Courts, however, have shown a tendency to broadly recognize willful blindness (미필적 고의) by weighing various circumstances together—abnormally high daily pay, hiring without any identity verification, and a job that consists of physically handing over cash. The reasoning is that if there were circumstances suggesting it might be a voice phishing crime, yet the person accepted that possibility and kept doing the work, criminal intent can be found.
That said, there are also rulings where the finding of intent turned on the specific recruitment circumstances, the content of the instructions, the level of pay, and the person's age and life experience, so each case requires careful case-by-case review.
Distinguishing a Co-Principal from an Aider and Abettor
Depending on the degree of involvement, the question is whether someone becomes a co-principal in the fraud or only an aider and abettor. A person who understood the structure of the crime and functionally shared in a role is treated as a co-principal, while a person who merely made the crime easier to commit is treated as an aider and abettor, whose sentence is reduced. Even for the same cash collector, the conclusion changes depending on the duration of involvement, the number of times, and the structure of profit-sharing, so this becomes the key issue in the defense argument.
Recovery of the Victim's Loss and Sentencing
Voice phishing crimes are classified as crimes that cause great harm to society, and it is not uncommon for a prison sentence to be imposed even on a first-time offender. A settlement with the victim and repayment of the loss are the most important factors in sentencing, so in cases where involvement is recognized, prompt efforts to make the victim whole are essential.
Why You Need the Help of a Criminal Defense Attorney
In cases involving participation in voice phishing, the outcome can change dramatically depending on whether criminal intent is found, the distinction between co-principal and aider and abettor, and the choice of which statute applies. In particular, because statements made in the first interrogation have a decisive effect all the way through to trial, you should be sure to get help from a criminal defense attorney to organize the facts and decide on a response strategy before undergoing police questioning.
