- South Korean police opened criminal cases against 26 Polymarket users and referred 18 to prosecutors.
- The wagers totaled about 17.6 billion won or roughly $12.7 million according to disclosed data.
- The legal dispute centers on whether Polymarket trading is gambling or a virtual asset derivatives investment.
Polymarket South Korea has moved into a legal dispute after police opened cases tied to roughly 17.6 billion won in wagers on political, economic, and social outcomes. Data disclosed on September 17 through Democratic Party lawmaker Yoon Geon-young’s office showed that 26 users were booked, while 18 were referred to prosecutors. The matter now turns on how courts view the platform’s activity under Korean law. Police say the trades amount to illegal gambling because virtual assets were staked on uncertain events, while users argue Polymarket should be viewed more like a virtual asset derivatives market.
Polymarket South Korea cases and wager totals
The Gangwon Police Agency’s Cyber Investigation Unit had booked 26 suspects as of September 15, according to a report from Asia Economy. Authorities also referred 18 of those users to prosecutors. The figures relate to trading activity on Polymarket, a prediction market platform where users take positions on real-world outcomes.
The total amount involved was about 17.6 billion won, or roughly $12.7 million. One user accounted for the largest single bet, which reached about 5.7 billion won, equal to around $4.1 million. The disclosed figures covered bets linked to political, economic, and social events.
How police traced users on Polymarket South Korea
Polymarket does not keep custody of user funds, and settlements are made automatically in USDC or pUSD based on real-world outcomes. Because of that structure, the platform does not maintain a real-name list showing who is trading on it.
Even so, law enforcement traced Korean users through public blockchain transaction records and open-source intelligence techniques. Police used those publicly available records despite the platform’s non-custodial design, showing how investigators connected blockchain activity to the users in the case.
The legal dispute over gambling or investment
Police say the transactions meet the standard for illegal gambling under Article 246 of the Criminal Code. Their position relies on a Supreme Court precedent that treats a bet as gambling when chance plays a role and money is staked on the outcome, even if skill is also involved.
Authorities also argue that calling the trades an investment does not change the legal character of the activity. In their view, a virtual asset was still put at risk on an outcome that could not be known in advance. Attorney Kim Tae-rim of AXIS Law said the setup could formally meet the legal definition of gambling because profits and losses depend on uncertain outcomes with virtual assets on the line.
The booked users take a different position. They argue that Polymarket should be treated as a virtual asset derivatives market rather than gambling, and that question is expected to become central once the cases reach court.
Access restrictions and wider pressure on the platform
The prosecutions followed South Korea’s August 18 decision to block domestic access to Polymarket. At that time, authorities said the platform’s winner-takes-all structure and betting on events outside users’ control encouraged gambling behavior.
Polymarket had argued that it was outside Korean jurisdiction after dropping Korean language service and won-denominated payments, but the commission rejected that claim. The platform has also faced similar resistance in France, Australia, and Germany, while Baltimore sued Polymarket and rival Kalshi last month over claims that they operate as unlicensed sportsbooks.
Conclusion
Polymarket South Korea now stands at the center of a court fight over how prediction market trading should be classified under Korean law. The known facts are that 26 users were booked, 18 were referred to prosecutors, and the wagers reached about 17.6 billion won, or roughly $12.7 million. Police traced users through public blockchain records and open-source intelligence, then argued the activity fits illegal gambling rules because virtual assets were placed on uncertain outcomes. The users disagree and say the platform should be treated as a virtual asset derivatives market, making that distinction the key issue as the cases move forward.
Disclaimer
The information provided in this article is for informational purposes only and should not be considered financial advice. The article does not offer sufficient information to make investment decisions, nor does it constitute an offer, recommendation, or solicitation to buy or sell any financial instrument. The content is opinion of the author and does not reflect any view or suggestion or any kind of advise from CryptoNewsBytes.com. The author declares he does not hold any of the above mentioned tokens or received any incentive from any company.
Featured image created by AI
