🚨 Bank Bands

Today Korean Social News for Beginners | 2025.09.07

0️⃣ Prosecutor's Evidence Loss Controversy and Money Tracking System Importance

📌 Prosecutors' 'Bank Band Strip Loss' Controversy... Political Battle Intensifies

💬 The Democratic Party has raised suspicions of intentional evidence destruction regarding prosecutors losing bank band strips from cash seized during a search of Mr. Jeon Seong-bae's home at Geunjin Law Firm, demanding swift investigation. During parliamentary hearings, there were ongoing disputes over responsibility and evasive answers claiming memory loss, drawing criticism as deceiving the public. Lawmaker Choo Mi-ae defined this as possible organized crime by prosecutors and emphasized the need for prosecutorial reform. The bank band strips were key evidence for tracking cash sources and money flow, but their loss by prosecutors has caused serious disruption to the investigation.

💡 Summary

• Bank bands are paper strips attached to cash bundles by banks, serving as key evidence for tracking money sources and flow.
• Prosecutors lost bank band strips seized during a search, raising suspicions of evidence destruction.
• This incident highlighted flaws in the evidence management system and the need for prosecutorial reform.

1️⃣ Definition

Bank bands are paper strips used by banks and financial institutions to bundle and store or distribute cash. They are usually attached to bundles of 10,000 won or 50,000 won bills and record which branch and when the money was withdrawn.

These small paper strips show bank name, branch name, withdrawal date, and staff information, making them important clues for tracking money sources and movement paths in criminal investigations. They can be thought of as 'ID cards' for cash.

💡 Why is this important?

• They are key evidence for revealing sources and distribution paths of illegal funds.
• They are important data for proving money flow in political fund or bribery cases.
• They are essential tracking clues when investigating money laundering crimes.
• They have high value as evidence, causing fatal damage to investigations when lost or damaged.

2️⃣ Progress and Issues of the Bank Band Loss Incident

📕 Incident Background and Key Issues

• Important evidence was secured during the search process. The main progress was as follows:

  • Prosecutors searched Mr. Jeon Seong-bae's home at Geunjin Law Firm and found a significant amount of cash.
  • Bank band strips were attached to the cash bundles, making it possible to track the money's source.
  • These bank band strips were evaluated as key evidence to reveal illegal political funds or bribery.
  • However, controversy began when this important evidence was lost during the investigation.

• Prosecutors' response and explanations intensified the controversy. The main problems were as follows:

  • Prosecutors did not properly disclose the loss of bank band strips initially.
  • They only explained the loss as staff error without revealing specific circumstances.
  • No internal inspection or disciplinary measures were taken for violating evidence management rules.
  • Even in parliamentary hearings, officials consistently answered that they could not remember.

📕 Political Impact and Party Disputes

• The ruling party strongly raised issues. The main claims were as follows:

  • The Democratic Party stated they suspect this was not a simple mistake but intentional evidence destruction.
  • They raised suspicions that prosecutors intentionally eliminated evidence unfavorable to the investigation.
  • Lawmaker Choo Mi-ae even mentioned the possibility of prosecutorial organized crime and urged strong investigation.
  • They are using this incident as evidence of the need for prosecutorial reform.

• Political trust decline and demands for system improvement are growing. The main impacts are as follows:

  • Public trust in prosecutors is significantly declining.
  • Voices calling for comprehensive improvement of the evidence management system are rising.
  • Discussions about strengthening checks and monitoring systems for prosecutorial power are becoming active.
  • Institutional supplements to increase transparency and accountability of investigative agencies are being demanded.

💡 Main Issues of the Bank Band Loss Incident

1. Evidence destruction suspicions: Unclear whether it was simple mistake or intentional evidence destruction
2. Responsibility issues: Controversy over passing blame between staff and leadership
3. Poor internal inspection: No proper investigation despite serious evidence loss
4. Investigation disruption: Difficulty in revealing case truth due to key evidence loss
5. System flaws: Exposure of structural problems in evidence management system

3️⃣ Importance of Money Tracking and Evidence Management Systems

✅ Role of Bank Bands in Financial Crime Investigation

• They are key tools for tracking money flow. The main functions are as follows:

  • Bank and branch information recorded on bank bands can identify cash withdrawal locations.
  • Withdrawal dates and times can accurately determine money movement timing.
  • Staff information can confirm specific circumstances of the withdrawal process.
  • Consecutive bank band numbers can determine whether large cash withdrawals occurred.

• They are essential evidence for political fund and bribery investigations. The main uses are as follows:

  • They can reveal the creation process and delivery paths of illegal political funds.
  • They can track the sources of bribes given by companies or individuals to politicians.
  • They become important data for proving the cash conversion stage in money laundering processes.
  • They can cross-verify suspects' statements with actual money flow.

✅ Need for Evidence Management System Improvement

• Problems with current evidence management have been revealed. The main limitations are as follows:

  • There is a lack of systematic systems for storing and managing seized items.
  • Differentiated management plans according to evidence importance are insufficient.
  • There is high risk of evidence loss during handover processes when staff changes.
  • Responsibility determination and disciplinary systems for evidence loss are unclear.

• Improvement measures and countermeasures are urgent. The main directions are as follows:

  • Building evidence management systems through digitalization is needed.
  • Double and triple storage systems for important evidence must be established.
  • Systems for immediate reporting and investigation when evidence is lost must be strengthened.
  • Evidence management supervision systems through external monitoring bodies should be introduced.
  • Regular education and responsibility awareness enhancement for staff is needed.

4️⃣ Related Terms Explanation

🔎 Anti-Money Laundering Act

• The Anti-Money Laundering Act is a law that prevents hiding and laundering of illegal funds.
  • The Anti-Money Laundering Act is legislation enacted to prevent acts of disguising criminally obtained funds as legitimate. It mandates financial institutions to report suspicious transactions and verify customer identities.
  • Main contents include: First, mandatory identity verification and record keeping for cash transactions above certain amounts. Second, suspicious financial transactions must be reported to the Financial Intelligence Unit (FIU). Third, financial institutions must preserve customer transaction records for 5 years. Fourth, violations can result in fines or criminal punishment.
  • Bank bands play an important role in this anti-money laundering system. Through bank band information that can track cash sources, illegal fund flows are identified and used to investigate money laundering crimes.

🔎 Political Funds Act

• The Political Funds Act is legislation for transparently managing funds used in political activities.
  • The Political Funds Act is legislation that regulates restrictions on collecting and using political funds, accounting reports, etc., to transparently manage political funds and prevent political corruption. It strictly limits the financial activities of politicians and political parties.
  • Main regulations include: First, limiting political fund donations from companies or organizations. Second, setting annual limits on individual political fund donations. Third, detailed recording and disclosure of political fund income and expenditure. Fourth, allowing cash donations only under limited circumstances.
  • Regarding bank bands, they become important evidence for distinguishing whether cash received by politicians is legitimate political funds or illegal bribes or sponsorship money. Particularly, bank bands can track whether cash came from companies or specific organizations.

🔎 Evidence Destruction Crime

• Evidence destruction crime is deliberately eliminating evidence needed for investigation or trial.
  • Evidence destruction crime is a crime of destroying, concealing, forging, or altering evidence related to others' criminal cases or disciplinary cases, as defined in Article 155 of the Criminal Code. It punishes acts that interfere with legitimate investigation and trial activities of investigative agencies or courts.
  • Requirements for evidence destruction crime include: First, it must be evidence related to others' criminal cases. Second, there must be acts of destroying, concealing, forging, or altering evidence. Third, it must be done intentionally, not established by negligence. Fourth, there must be possibility of interfering with investigation or trial.
  • Regarding this bank band loss incident, if prosecutor staff intentionally eliminated bank bands, it could constitute evidence destruction crime. However, if lost through simple mistake or negligence, evidence destruction crime is not established, and instead responsibility for dereliction of duty or professional negligence may apply. Punishment is imprisonment for up to 5 years or fines up to 7 million won.

5️⃣ Frequently Asked Questions (FAQ)

Q: Can money sources be tracked even without bank bands?

A: Other methods exist, but none are as direct and clear evidence as bank bands.

• Money tracking is possible without bank bands, but requires much more time and effort. First, withdrawal records from relevant accounts can be checked through bank computer systems. However, if there were multiple large cash withdrawals, it's difficult to identify exactly which cash it was. Second, the withdrawal process can be confirmed through CCTV or witness statements, but evidence may disappear over time. Third, people who touched the cash can be tracked through forensic science like fingerprints or DNA, but there are many practical limitations.
• The biggest advantage of bank bands is that they are immediately verifiable direct evidence. Bank name, branch name, and date are specified, so sources can be known immediately without separate investigation. When bank bands are lost like this time, investigations become much more complex and take longer.

Q: What responsibilities can be demanded for prosecutors' evidence loss?

A: Various responsibility pursuits are possible, including dereliction of duty, evidence destruction, and inspection demands.

• Prosecutors' evidence loss can be held responsible at multiple levels. First, for criminal responsibility, evidence destruction crime can apply if evidence was intentionally eliminated, or dereliction of duty if lost through negligence. Second, for administrative responsibility, disciplinary measures under the State Public Officials Act (warning, reprimand, salary reduction, suspension, dismissal, discharge) can be received. Third, political responsibility can be pursued through parliamentary audits or investigations. Fourth, truth can be revealed through internal inspections by the Ministry of Justice or Supreme Prosecutors' Office.
• Citizens can also actively raise issues. Reports through the government petition system, civil organization accusations, and media coverage requests are possible. Most importantly, evidence management systems must be improved to prevent recurrence of such incidents.

Q: What methods can prevent such evidence loss in the future?

A: Digitalization, double storage, and external monitoring system establishment are key.

• Comprehensive improvement measures are needed to prevent evidence loss. First, digital evidence management systems must be introduced. Seized evidence can be immediately recorded in photos or videos, and blockchain technology can be used to prevent forgery or alteration. Second, important evidence must be stored in double or triple copies. Originals are stored in safe places while copies are made for investigation use. Third, systems for real-time tracking of evidence management processes are needed. All records must be kept of when and who accessed which evidence.
• Institutional improvements are also important. External specialized institutions should supervise evidence management, and systems for immediate reporting when lost should be created. Also, regular education and responsibility awareness enhancement for staff is needed. Most importantly, transparency must be increased so citizens can monitor investigative agencies' evidence management processes.

Table of Contents

• Go to Guide