Kim Nam-guk "I Invested My Own Money... Put 600 Million Won in Jeonse Deposit and Live on Monthly Rent"

"Converting 6 Billion Won Worth of Coins to Cash? Transfer, Not Withdrawal"
Refutation Despite 'Conflict of Interest' Controversy Over Bill Proposal

Kim Nam-guk, a member of the Democratic Party of Korea, clarified on the 9th regarding the controversy over his cryptocurrency holdings, stating, "I invested my own money ('Naedonnaetu' - investing my own money)," and explained, "At the time, I was working as a lawyer, so the money was earned through my profession."

On the same day, Kim appeared on the YouTube program 'Kim Eo-jun's News Factory' and, when asked about the source of his investment funds, he explained, "The lease deposit I had reached its maturity, so I took 600 million won of the deposit and invested it in LG Display. I used the lease deposit as initial investment capital for cryptocurrency," adding, "After withdrawing the lease deposit, I moved to Ansan and lived in a monthly rental."

Kim stated, "There was not a single transaction made without using my own name." He further explained, "I have never borrowed or taken loans from individuals. I do have one overdraft account, but it is also under my name," and added, "I once lent about 7 million won to a junior who was in financial difficulty, but I reported this in my asset declaration."

Democratic Party of Korea lawmaker Kim Nam-guk, who has been embroiled in controversy over holding virtual assets, is entering his office at the National Assembly Members' Office Building in Yeouido, Seoul, on the morning of the 9th.
[Image source=Yonhap News]

On that day, Kim addressed the allegations against him one by one. Regarding the background of his investment in 'Wemix,' he explained, "Many companies issuing cryptocurrencies are either non-existent or paper companies, but Wemix was a coin issued by Wemade, a listed and large company, so I judged it to be highly reliable."

When questioned about suspicions that he sold at the peak using insider information before the stock price plummeted, he responded, "The peak was actually 30,000 won. I sold at a time when the price had already been falling for quite a while." Kim added, "If I had used undisclosed information to sell, I would have sold at the peak right before the crash. To obtain insider information, one would have to know key figures or industry workers in cryptocurrency, but I have never even met people at the lower levels of the industry."

Regarding the allegation that he cashed out 6 billion won worth of Wemix coins, he said, "Between January and March last year, just before the implementation of the real-name transaction system, I withdrew 4.4 million won in four transactions. That was allowance money for my parents." Kim clarified, "It was a transfer, not a withdrawal. The rest of the amount was transferred to my account on another exchange with real-name verification," adding, "That account is also mine. During this process, I never transferred to others or used accounts under other people's names."

He also firmly stated that he never used accounts without real-name verification even before the Travel Rule (real-name system for virtual asset transactions) was enforced.

Regarding the reason the Financial Intelligence Unit (FIU) classified Kim's coin transactions as 'suspicious transactions' and reported them to investigative agencies, he said, "I have not been notified. I understand that investigations are conducted when transactions exceed a certain amount and are judged suspicious." He continued, "From a lawyer's perspective, the fact that the search warrant for account seizure was dismissed means that the allegations related to criminal charges were almost entirely not recognized," adding, "If you look at the warrant, it will be disappointing. It is only a few pages."

Kim claimed that the allegations against him are a "political investigation." He said, "I heard that the FIU requested the investigation around mid-February last year," and criticized, "Holding onto this and suddenly leaking it through a specific media outlet seems somewhat like a political investigation."

Regarding the conflict of interest controversy during the push for a cryptocurrency tax deferral bill, he said, "(The timing of cryptocurrency investment) was before the Conflict of Interest Prevention Act and the revised National Assembly Act took effect," explaining, "The Conflict of Interest Prevention Act was enacted in 2021, and the National Assembly Act regulating conflicts of interest for lawmakers was revised around May 2021, but both laws came into effect in May 2022."

He continued, "Even under the revised laws, it is not a violation. Laws that repeal or amend regulations targeting the unspecified majority do not apply, and the revised National Assembly Act does not include joint sponsorship or voting in the conflict of interest provisions," adding, "Applying the same logic, if lawmakers who own multiple houses propose or vote on bills to abolish or reduce comprehensive real estate taxes that benefit multi-homeowners, it would all be considered conflicts of interest. It does not constitute a conflict of interest."

This content was produced with the assistance of AI translation services.