The Gwangjin Police Station in Seoul is investigating a case reported by the Saemaeul Geumgo Federation against Mr. A, the chairman of a Saemaeul Geumgo in Seoul, on suspicion of violating the real-name financial transactions law and embezzlement. The central allegation reported is that he created 139 alias deposits worth approximately 11 billion won using the names of employees, executives, and relatives. However, the information currently available concerns allegations under investigation, and the case has not resulted in a final conviction.

Key Developments

The Saemaeul Geumgo Federation reportedly uncovered signs of misconduct during an audit in June 2026 and filed a complaint with police on August 6. The Seoul Gwangjin Police Station subsequently received the complaint and is examining suspected violations of the real-name financial transactions law and embezzlement. The case’s biggest current development is that it has progressed from a Federation audit to a police investigation.

According to reports, Mr. A is suspected of managing deposits under the names of employees, executives, and relatives rather than his own. Because large sums were divided among accounts held in several names, the relationship between the account holders and the actual ownership and management of the funds may be a major focus of the investigation.

The scale reported to date is 139 deposits worth approximately 11 billion won.

Current Status

Police reportedly found indications that, when the deposits matured, the accounts were closed without the account holders’ consent, then redeposited under the same names with interest added, while checks and cash were used. This suggests that investigators are examining not merely the existence of multiple accounts, but also how maturity management and the movement of funds were carried out.

The Act on Real Name Financial Transactions and Confidentiality requires financial companies and others to conduct financial transactions under customers’ real names and prohibits financial transactions under another person’s real name for the purpose of evading the law. The legal issues in this investigation therefore include whether the use of other people’s names falls within the prohibited purpose and method under the real-name financial transactions law, and whether the use of the credit union’s funds is connected to the embezzlement allegation.

The purpose of avoiding taxes or health insurance premiums has been mentioned in reports as a possible background to the investigation, but it has not been confirmed as an officially established fact. No response from the person concerned or separate official briefing from investigators has been identified in the publicly available material.

Impact

The case illustrates both an investigation into allegations against an individual chairman and the Saemaeul Geumgo Federation’s internal oversight process. The Saemaeul Geumgo Act provides that the Federation chairman may guide and supervise credit unions and inspect their assets and the status of their business operations. The reported sequence in which the Federation identified the circumstances during an audit and then filed a police complaint is therefore relevant to understanding the role of that supervisory authority in handling the case.

However, the confirmed facts do not support generalizing about the deposit safety of all Saemaeul Geumgo institutions or the operating conditions of other credit unions. The publicly identified subject is Mr. A, chairman of one Saemaeul Geumgo in Seoul, and no additional circumstances, such as victims or deposit withdrawals, have been confirmed.

What to Watch Next

The next points to watch are how the police investigation establishes the actual relationships between the names used for the 139 alias deposits and the way the funds were sourced and managed, as well as what use of credit union funds is confirmed in connection with the embezzlement allegation. Any disclosure of the Federation’s audit findings, additional complaints, or follow-up measures will also be important.

Readers should check three things. First, whether the Gwangjin Police Station provides an update or official announcement on the investigation. Second, any follow-up audit or supervisory measures by the Saemaeul Geumgo Federation. Third, how the alleged purpose of avoiding taxes or health insurance premiums is addressed in the investigation’s findings or an official announcement. At this stage, it is important to distinguish between the reported allegations and the investigative procedures that have been confirmed.