Open Decision Ledger · Capital markets & finance
Method for Calculating Profits Obtained from Market Manipulation and the Scope of Responsibility of a Joint Principal Offender Who Participates Midway Through a Single Comprehensive Offense
Translated from the Korean original. Read the Korean
Supreme Court, Nov. 15, 2007, 2007Do6336 (judgment)
No holding summary · checked against points at issue. The official text publishes no summary of the holding for this decision. The quotation and factors in this record are copied verbatim from the points at issue; the evidence for each axis is taken from the points at issue, the order and the reasons.
Case name: 증권거래법위반·특정경제범죄가중처벌등에관한법률위반(사기)·공문서위조·위조공문서행사·출입국관리법위반
Official text on the National Law Information Center
Question
How are profits obtained from market manipulation calculated, and for which trades does a joint principal offender who joins midway through a single comprehensive offense bear responsibility?
Holding
The profit obtained from the violating act is the net trading profit, calculated by deducting the total purchase amount and transaction costs such as commissions and the securities transaction tax from the total sales amount. A joint principal offender who joined midway bears responsibility only for the acts committed after joining, even if that offender was aware of the prior offenses. The Supreme Court found that there was no evidence to establish the net trading profit earned after the participation, and upheld the court below, which did not apply the aggravated punishment provision.
Points at issue, verbatim
증권거래법 제207조의2 제1항 단서 및 제2항에서 규정하고 있는 ‘위반행위로 얻은 이익’의 의미 및 그 산정 방법
Unofficial English translation
Meaning of 'the profits gained from the violation' as provided in the proviso to Article 207-2 (1) and Article 207-2 (2) of the Securities and Exchange Act and the method of calculating the same
Disposition
Dismissed Stated in the decision
상고를 모두 기각한다.
Unofficial English translation
All appeals are dismissed.
Form of the test
Existing test applied Read from the decision
위와 같은 법리에 비추어 기록을 살펴 보면
Unofficial English translation
Upon examining the records in light of the legal principle stated above,
Factors
- ‘위반행위로 얻은 이익’의 의미 및 그 산정 방법
- 포괄일죄의 범행 도중에 공동정범으로 범행에 가담한 자의 형사책임의 범위
- (=가담 이후 범행)
Unofficial English translation
• Meaning of 'the profits gained from the violation' and the method of calculating the same
• Scope of the criminal liability of a person who participated in an offense as a joint principal offender in the course of a single comprehensive offense
• (= offenses committed after participation)
Relation to precedent
Follows earlier decisions Stated in the decision
대법원 2004. 5. 28. 선고 2004도1465 판결
Unofficial English translation
Supreme Court Decision 2004Do1465 decided May 28, 2004
Decisions referred to
[1] 대법원 2004. 5. 28. 선고 2004도1465 판결(공2004하, 1129) / [2] 대법원 1997. 6. 27. 선고 97도163 판결(공1997하, 2234)
Burden of proof
Not addressed Not in the decision
Open question and revisit condition
Where the trades made before and after the participation are intermingled so that the net trading profit earned after the participation is difficult to calculate separately, by what method should the profit be apportioned and calculated?
This reading is to be re-examined if Supreme Court precedent on the method of calculating unjust gains from market manipulation or on the scope of responsibility of a midway participant in a single comprehensive offense changes.
Cross-family AI independent reading & axis check
7 of 8 axes matched GPT-6 Astra (OpenAI, codex CLI) · 2026-10-16
When compared with an independent reading by another AI series (GPT-6 Astra), which read only the original text without seeing the primary reading, 7 of the 8 axes agreed, and the readings diverged on axis 4 (Form of the test).
Axis 4 (Form of the test): Primary “Existing test applied” vs Independent “Elements stated”
As the original text presents the method of calculating profit and a scope of responsibility limited to the period after participation, and dismisses the final appeal, the primary reading may place weight on application to the facts, while the independent reading may place weight on general calculation criteria and the elements of responsibility.
포괄일죄의 범행 도중에 공동정범으로 범행에 가담한 자의 형사책임의 범위(=가담 이후 범행)Raw responses and comparison record: Protocol · Blind readings (JSONL) · Axis comparison (JSONL) · SHA-256 (JSON)
Lower-court contrast & scope of application
Lower-court reading vs. Supreme Court holding
Lower-court context: The court below (Seoul High Court Judgment 2006No2345 decided June 29, 2007) found that there was insufficient material to establish the net trading profit arising from trades made after approximately August 20, 2002, when Defendant 1 joined the offense, and thus that there was no evidence of a profit of 5 billion won or more or of 500 million won or more, and did not apply Article 207-2 paragraph (2) of the Securities and Exchange Act. All counts charged against Defendant 2 were found not guilty, while the remaining offenses of Defendant 1 as found were held guilty.
Supreme Court standard: The Supreme Court, in light of the legal principle for calculating net trading profit and the legal principle governing the scope of responsibility of a joint principal offender who joins midway, held the determination of the court below to be proper. It rejected both the prosecution's arguments of misapprehension of legal principles and violation of the rules of evidence and Defendant 1's arguments of misapprehension of facts and improper sentencing, and dismissed the final appeal.
Distinguishing conditions
- Where the defendant is found to have conspired from the stage of the commencement of the offense and joined it, so that the profit for the entire trading period falls within the scope of responsibility
- Where the market manipulation was carried out by a means other than actual trades, making it difficult to calculate the profit as the difference between the total sales amount and the total purchase amount
- Where, from the trades made after the participation alone, a net trading profit of not less than the amount required for the aggravated punishment standard is separately confirmed on the record
Record verification notes
Before asserting the same conclusion, one needs to check whether the point of participation is identifiable on the record, and whether transaction costs such as commissions and the securities transaction tax were deducted from the net trading profit calculated solely from the trades made after that point.
From the official text
Points at issue
[1] 증권거래법 제207조의2 제1항 단서 및 제2항에서 규정하고 있는 ‘위반행위로 얻은 이익’의 의미 및 그 산정 방법 [2] 포괄일죄의 범행 도중에 공동정범으로 범행에 가담한 자의 형사책임의 범위(=가담 이후 범행)
Unofficial English translation
[1] Meaning of 'the profits gained from the violation' as provided in the proviso to Article 207-2 (1) and Article 207-2 (2) of the Securities and Exchange Act and the method of calculating the same [2] Scope of the criminal liability of a person who participated in an offense as a joint principal offender in the course of a single comprehensive offense (= offenses committed after participation)
Summary of the holding
The official text publishes no summary of the holding for this decision. The quotation and factors in this record are copied verbatim from the points at issue; the evidence for each axis is taken from the points at issue, the order and the reasons.
Order
상고를 모두 기각한다.
Unofficial English translation
All appeals are dismissed.
Provisions referred to
[1] 증권거래법 제207조의2 제1항, 제2항 [2] 형법 제30조
Read 2026-10-16 · Cross-read 2026-10-16. All quotes matched against the official text. The Chinese-character placeholders the court used for anonymised parties are given in their Korean readings, and parenthetical Chinese-character glosses are omitted.
Every entry is published only after all quotes have been matched character by character against the official text, and audited by an independent second reading from a different model family across all eight axes. Both agreed axes and text-grounded interpretive divergences are recorded openly. The ledger is a research record, not an assessment of the court or advice on any matter.
Back to the ledger