Violations of South Korea's Farmland Act rarely result in more than fines, even when cases reach trial, an investigation has found.
According to data on "Annual Farmland Act Violation Case Processing Status" obtained by The Seoul Economic Daily from the Supreme Prosecutors' Office, only one of 37 Farmland Act violation cases disposed by prosecutors in January this year resulted in indictment—just 2.7% of the total. Even that single case proceeded to trial without detention. Fifteen cases were referred for summary indictment, while five resulted in non-indictment.
The indictment rate for Farmland Act violations has been declining steadily. In 2023, 222 of 1,359 cases (16%) resulted in indictment, dropping to 81 of 738 cases (10.9%) in 2024.
Even when cases reach trial, courts typically hand down lenient sentences such as fines. An analysis of 45 first-instance court verdicts last year—excluding three sealed due to anonymization issues from a total of 48—found 36 resulted in fines, seven in suspended sentences, and two in suspended pronouncement of sentence. Not a single defendant received actual prison time. In 2024, only 10 of 183 dispositions involved imprisonment, with more than half—108 cases—resulting in simple fines, indicating overall low punishment levels for Farmland Act violations.
This leniency leaves investigative agencies with little incentive to pursue cases aggressively. Farmland Act violations are difficult for police to detect independently, making authorities effectively dependent on tips or formal complaints to initiate investigations. A police investigator in Seoul said, "I haven't seen a recent case where police proactively launched an investigation based on suspected Farmland Act violations. Except for cases involving high-ranking officials or politicians, it's rare for investigative agencies to first identify illegal farmland acquisitions by ordinary citizens."
The diversity of illegal activities also complicates detection. Beyond speculation—acquiring farmland without farming to profit from price appreciation—many cases involve illegal tenant farming arrangements, which are prohibited with limited exceptions, often by owners who purchased land but cannot dispose of it and reluctantly farm it themselves.
Experts say that while criminal penalties matter, administrative sanctions should be strengthened, including disposal orders and recovery of excess profits upon sale. Lim Dong-han, an attorney at Dongin Law Firm, said, "Even with criminal penalty provisions, Farmland Act violations are classified as crimes with strong administrative and policy purposes, so courts tend to judge them relatively lightly. Strengthening administrative sanctions such as recovery of excess profits upon sale would be more appropriate from a criminal policy perspective."