Law firms revamp response strategies after abolition of prosecutors’ office, from initial investigation through indictment

[Financial News] The abolition of the Supreme Prosecutors’ Office of the Republic of Korea and the separation of investigations from prosecutions are reshaping the criminal justice system—and changing how law firms handle criminal cases. With prosecutors’ direct supplementary investigations abolished in principle, greater emphasis is being placed on defense strategies that link the securing of initial statements and evidence, responses to different investigative agencies, and the prosecution stage.
According to legal circles on the 14th, the Supreme Prosecutors’ Office of the Republic of Korea was abolished on the 2nd, and the Serious Crime Investigation Agency (SCIA) and the Public Prosecution Office were launched, organizationally separating the investigative and prosecutorial functions in criminal cases. Under the amended Criminal Procedure Act of the Republic of Korea, investigative agencies such as the police and the SCIA conduct investigations, while prosecutors at the Public Prosecution Office are responsible for filing and maintaining prosecutions. Prosecutors’ direct investigations and direct supplementary investigations have been abolished in principle.
As a result, law firms are developing their responses to focus less on relying on supplementary investigations at the former prosecution stage and more on securing sufficient statements and evidence at the first investigative agency, then pursuing a consistent strategy through referral and the decision on whether to prosecute. Managing jurisdiction, procedures and deadlines together has also become a key task in preparation for cases that may pass through multiple investigative agencies.
YK Law Firm is revising its response standards for each stage of an investigation through a task force (TF) on the amended Criminal Procedure Act, led by Bae Seong-beom, head of its Criminal Litigation Group and a former chief of a high prosecutors’ office.
YK’s system draws on specialists with experience in investigations by prosecutors and police to coordinate responses across the entire case, from the initial inquiry and objections to decisions not to refer cases, through supplementary investigations and reinvestigations, to the Public Prosecution Office stage.
In particular, the firm is focusing on identifying the nature of the investigative agency and the direction of the case from the outset, while strengthening legal responses at each stage and communication with clients. It also operates YourK, a client communication system that shares updates on case progress.
Bae, the group head, emphasized, “The changed investigative system has left parties to cases facing a much greater burden than before,” adding, “There is a strong need for them to respond more proactively from the outset at each stage of the investigation and prosecution process.”
Lee & Ko is focusing on coordinating systems for responding to different investigative agencies in corporate criminal cases. It recently held a seminar titled “How Will Investigative Structures and Practices Change in the Era of the Serious Crime Investigation Agency, the Public Prosecution Office and Special Judicial Police?” to discuss changes in investigative structures and corporate responses in fair trade, finance, serious industrial accidents and labor.
Lee & Ko has built a response system covering the process from investigations by regulatory agencies such as the Fair Trade Commission, the Financial Supervisory Service and labor offices, through investigations by the police and the SCIA, to prosecution decisions by the Public Prosecution Office. The system takes into account the possibility that multiple agencies may investigate corporate cases simultaneously or in succession.
Lee & Ko Managing Partner Kim Hu-gon emphasized, “Investigative competition among the SCIA, the police and special judicial police may intensify,” adding, “There is a need to establish a coordinated response system for investigative and prosecutorial agencies.”
Bae, Kim & Lee has fleshed out strategies for selecting investigative agencies and securing evidence, focusing on technology leak cases. In a newsletter published on the 2nd, it explained that because the SCIA, the police and special judicial police of the Ministry of Intellectual Property can each exercise investigative authority over technology leak cases, the appropriate investigative agency must be determined based on the nature of the case and the applicable laws.
The firm stressed the importance of securing corporate technical materials and digital evidence at an early stage and thoroughly explaining the technical facts to investigative agencies. It said the entire investigation and trial process needs to be managed with possible case transfers between investigative agencies and supplementary investigation requests from the Public Prosecution Office in mind.
Jipyong also released a guide to responding to corporate criminal cases on the 2nd. It outlined changes in the jurisdiction of investigative agencies and referral procedures following the separation of investigations from prosecutions, how to challenge decisions not to refer cases, and deadlines for supplementary investigations and reinvestigations.
Jipyong explained that response procedures differ depending on which agency investigates a case, and that the steps to prepare for also vary between the investigative agency and Public Prosecution Office stages. It advised companies to identify the agency with jurisdiction from the outset and systematically track the time limits for challenges and the progress of investigations.
Statutory deadlines for each procedure are also a key factor in defense strategy. Under the amended Criminal Procedure Act of the Republic of Korea, judicial police officers must, in principle, complete an investigation within one month of receiving a request for a supplementary investigation. A three-month deadline generally applies to objections to decisions not to refer cases. However, some systems—including coordination of jurisdiction between investigative agencies and video recording of search-and-seizure procedures—will be introduced in phases starting in 2027.
Although law firms’ approaches differ, they all emphasize the importance of responding early in an investigation and managing procedures across agencies. YK focuses on response standards across all stages of a case and client communication; Lee & Ko on corporate responses to multiple investigative agencies; Bae, Kim & Lee on securing evidence in technology leak cases; and Jipyong on managing procedures and deadlines.
A managing partner at a major law firm said, “As the reform of the criminal justice system is still in its early stages, we will have to see how coordination of jurisdiction between investigative agencies and requests for supplementary investigations are handled in actual cases,” and predicted, “Law firms’ response strategies will also develop from initial systems prepared for the changes, incorporating the realities of investigative and prosecutorial practice.” 

[email protected] Yu Seon-jun Reporter