South Korean lawmaker Kim Nam-kuk was acquitted of crypto concealment charges. The court rules that he’s not required to disclose virtual asset holdings.
A court has cleared South Korean legislator Kim Nam-kuk of allegations about hiding cryptocurrency holdings, ruling that the country’s laws did not require him to reveal virtual assets at the time.
Judge Jeong Woo-Yong of the Southern Seoul District Court’s 9th Criminal Division acquitted Kim of allegations that he hindered public duty by dishonesty, according to a February 10 story in the South Korean newspaper Chosun Daily.
Before the Financial Action Task Force’s (FATF) “Travel Rule,” which mandates disclosure of crypto holdings, was implemented by the nation’s lawmakers, Kim was accused of liquidating cryptocurrency assets and failing to disclose a profit of almost $4.5 million.
Kim said he intended to relieve party members of the strain caused by the lawsuit, ultimately leading to his exit from the Democratic Party.
A legislator from South Korea cleared all charges.
Prosecutors accused Kim Nam-kuk of hiding his cryptocurrency holdings to obstruct the National Assembly’s Ethics Committee’s examination of MPs’ financial declarations.
Prosecutors demanded a six-month prison sentence for Kim on December 18, 2024, claiming that he reported 1.2 billion won ($834,000) in total assets in 2021, even though he held about 9.9 billion won ($6.8 million) in bitcoin.
Prosecutors claimed that Kim impeded the Ethics Committee’s examination of the assets of National Assembly members because she owned the assets, which might create a conflict of interest.
Judge Jeong, however, decided that at the time, South Korea’s Public Service Ethics Act did not require mandatory declaration of virtual assets. The court found it challenging to conclude that the politician had to reveal his assets.
The court further stated that although the Ethics Committee could not ascertain Kim’s entire worth, it was unclear whether dishonesty impeded its ability to conduct its examination. The court concluded that there was no criminal evidence in this case.
Prosecutors may still file an appeal in a higher court even if the lawmaker was found not guilty in a court of first instance.
Kim had some control over regulations about digital assets because she was a member of the National Assembly. According to reports, the member-supported legislation would have deferred a 20% tax on cryptocurrency earnings. Although he has denied any wrongdoing, some have questioned if his cryptocurrency holdings posed a conflict of interest.
