“Overseas e-commerce customer service, starting salary 4 million KRW, accommodation provided.”

  On the surface, this sentence sounds like a great opportunity. Nevertheless, when the blanks in that sentence—such as company identity, contract terms, visa type, and the right to hold one’s passport—are not clearly filled in, those blanks can become traps that consume someone’s life.

  The recent overseas employment scam incident in Cambodia is not merely a public safety issue. It is a structural accident born from cracks in the unstable youth labor market and the employment ecosystem.

  Youth are trying to survive in a world where the resume is treated like an asset: qualifications are calculated, postings keep changing, openings rise and fall with the economy and policy, and hiring drags on. After enough time and money, even trying feels costly, that is when a fancy-looking shortcut shows up. Overseas jobs can look great on a resume, sometimes even with free housing and pay that seems too good to be true. When those offers bypass proper verification, the risk slips in right alongside them.

  As a junior university student now entering job hunting, I see how much uncertainty and competition hide behind stability. The long process—documents, tests, and interviews—drains time, money, and confidence. In those doubts about whether I am even knocking on the right door, unverified, and sweet offers slip in. “You just need to be brave once.” sounds encouraging, but it can blur the checks we actually need.

  That is why the recent incident in Cambodia matters. Its root cause was not only individual carelessness, but also the absence of a proper system. This danger is not limited to overseas. Employment scams targeting youth are spreading in various forms domestically as well.

  For instance, social media advertisements promoting high-income work-from-home jobs often request copies of IDs and bankbooks, which are then used to open fake accounts or support voice phishing scams.

  Some schemes pose as internships requiring upfront training fees, only to disappear without providing actual work. Others impersonate subcontractors of well-known brands, promising a share of profits from product sales but turning out to be online sales scams.

  These scams may appear to be legitimate jobs, but in most cases, there are no written contracts or clear legal employment relationships. While the specific forms of damage vary, the underlying structure is the same.

  There is a lack of trustworthy public data on job roles, companies, visa and wage structures. The verification connections between job platforms, universities’ career centers, and public institutions are weak. With entryways narrowed to metropolitan areas, major corporations, and regular positions, while local and small business jobs go unfilled, it is no wonder that overseas or non-permanent positions seem more attractive. The less transparent the information is, the greater the anxiety—and the more sophisticated the scams that prey on that anxiety become.

  In short, while society keeps repeating that individuals must be more cautious, the basic safety structures that should exist have been left empty.

  The solutions do not need to be grand. Overseas job posts must disclose core facts, such as company, key contract terms, visa type and sponsor, local address and reporting body, and platforms must block listings inappropriate. At home and abroad, any hiring that asks for sensitive personal data or upfront payments must be banned. Government ministries and private platforms ought to run a shared dashboard showing risk by country and industry, while universities should move beyond posting notices to providing regular training on contracts, visas, and scam patterns, plus a one-stop system for legal, psychological, and financial support when damage occurs.

  For individuals, the task is simpler: every opportunity has a cost. When it looks too easy, someone else is probably paying for it—and that someone must not be my passport, my labor, or my credit. Do not ask, “Is this to my advantage?” Ask, “What conditions must be true for this deal to work?” That one habit is our bare-minimum safety check.

  I am back on the job-search road—still uncertain. One thing is clear: a good job does not end at acceptance; it starts with rights. Do not just ask the young for courage; let the state, universities, and platforms put safety and verification in place first. Without that, the next victim would not be a number but someone with a name. In a society that can withstand questions, shortcuts stop turning into traps.