At the height of the controversy, Vietnamese media repeatedly reported that KRAFTON had “lost” trillions of dong in market value. That gave rise to a hypothesis: a major shareholder was exploiting the drama to divest.
This article tests the claim the way a financial analyst would. We define it precisely, gather sourced data, check the logic, then state what would confirm or refute it.
This is a hypothesis article. Scamany gives no investment advice and accuses no shareholder.
Sourced data
Share price (per Znews; KRAFTON, KRX: 259960):
| Date | Price | Note |
|---|---|---|
| 1 Sep 2026 | KRW 231,000 | Before the event |
| 17 Sep 2026 | KRW 203,000 | Start of the event, already down about 12% from 1 Sep |
| 23 Sep 2026 | KRW 198,000 | About 2.46% below 17 Sep; a 52-week low |
With about 45.9 million shares, the 17–23 September drop equals roughly KRW 217–229 billion in market value, about USD 159–168 million. Znews gives both figures. Total market value on 23 September was about KRW 9.09 trillion (45.9 million × KRW 198,000).
Results (per Znews): Q2 2026 revenue rose 95% to KRW 1.29 trillion, but net profit was minus KRW 29.9 billion, versus plus KRW 15.5 billion a year earlier.
Ownership (DART filing of 23 September 2026, per Datatooza):
- The largest shareholder and related parties went from 22.93% to 22.97%, an increase of 0.04 points.
- The cause: an affiliate executive, Jang Tae-seok, was added as a related party with 20,289 shares, reported on 16 September. This is not a sale.
- Largest shareholder and founder Chang Byung-gyu holds 7,173,842 shares (15.62%), unchanged.
- Per public data aggregators (update date unclear), other large holders include Tencent (via Image Frame Investment) at about 13.9% and Korea’s National Pension Service (NPS) at about 7.1%.
The hypothesis has three possible meanings
“Using the drama to divest” can be read three ways, each with very different logic.
Meaning A — Creating or prolonging the drama as a pretext to sell
Logic check: a seller benefits most from a high price. Creating bad news that lowers the price means selling your own asset cheaply. This only makes sense for someone short-selling or holding derivatives that profit from a fall, which would require short-interest data that is not available.
Assessment: economically self-defeating, and no data supports it.
Meaning B — Selling during the drama to avoid further losses
This is rational for any investor. But in Korea, major shareholders and insiders must disclose ownership changes on DART. There are two main reports: the 5%+ holding report (주식등의대량보유상황보고서) and the executive and major-shareholder ownership report.
Available data: the only filing we found in this period (23 September) shows the largest-shareholder group increasing its stake. For Tencent and NPS, we found no reduction filing in September 2026.
Assessment: not supported for the largest-shareholder group; unverified for other holders.
Meaning C — The drama as “cover” for a decline with other causes
Partly supported: the stock fell about 12% in the two weeks before the event, and the company posted a Q2 net loss despite higher revenue. The downtrend predates the drama, so media may be over-attributing the fall to it.
However: “cover” only matters if someone benefits from the public misreading the cause, such as a shareholder who is selling. That brings us back to Meaning B, which has no supporting data.
Assessment: “the drama is overstated as an explanation of the price” is reasonable. “Someone used it as cover to sell” has no data behind it.
The drama’s real effect on the stock
Isolating the drama’s effect is difficult, for three reasons:
- A 2.46% fall over five sessions is much smaller than the roughly 12% fall in the preceding two weeks.
- In the same period the market was also reacting to Q2 results and macro factors, which this article does not measure.
- There is no public figure for Vietnam’s share of revenue. KRAFTON reports only that 93% of revenue comes from overseas (per Kenh14, 2024 data).
So headlines like “X trillion wiped out by the drama” are a figure of speech, not a causal measurement.
What would confirm or refute it?
| If this appears | Then |
|---|---|
| DART filings showing a 5%+ holder or executive reducing their stake in Sep–Oct 2026 | Meaning B is strengthened for that holder |
| A spike in short interest (공매도 잔고) linked to a related party | Meaning A deserves another look |
| No stake-reduction filings by major holders | The hypothesis fails |
Check it yourself on DART
- Go to dart.fss.or.kr and search for 크래프톤 (259960).
- Filter by ownership disclosures (지분공시).
- Review 주식등의대량보유상황보고서 and 임원·주요주주특정증권등소유상황보고서 for the period in question.
Conclusion
On current public data, the hypothesis that “a major shareholder used the drama to divest” is not supported:
- The largest-shareholder group increased its stake.
- The “create drama to sell” reading is economically self-defeating.
- The price decline began before the drama.
What is well-founded is that the drama’s effect on the share price is being exaggerated in coverage. If new DART filings show a major holder selling, Scamany will update this assessment.
Further reading: impact on KRAFTON and the market · the event’s finances.