“Strategy when involved in a high-paying part-time job in Southeast Asia”... How to deal with a suspect whose 10-year sentence was overturned

Interview with attorney Nam Kwon-yul at Daeryun Law Firm

“Looking for a part-time translation job. High profits guaranteed.”
Person A, a woman in her 20s, boarded a plane to Laos in 2022 after receiving an offer for a highly profitable part-time job. Mr. A's life suddenly fell into the abyss after he had hopes for a new beginning. As soon as I arrived at the site, my passport was taken away, I was imprisoned, and I was assigned work. After escaping for her life, she returned to Korea, but she was investigated as a suspect, not a victim.

The prosecution viewed Mr. A as the key manager of a voice phishing crime organization worth about 170 million won and requested 10 years in prison. The prosecution presented as key evidence that the IP address used in the crime and Mr. A's financial account access address were the same. However, the first trial court found Mr. A not guilty.

According to the Ministry of Foreign Affairs, the number of reports of Koreans being detained in Cambodia increased from 1 in 2022 to 330 last year (January to August). It was discovered that these criminal organizations mainly lure young people through social media with phrases such as ‘Recruiting for a large overseas Telemachine branch in Southeast Asia’.

In relation to this, lawyer Nam Kwon-yul of Daeryun Law Firm, who represented Mr. A, emphasized, “High-profit part-time jobs overseas are likely to involve college students in their early or mid-20s with no social experience,” and added, “There are cases where you are prosecuted without actually committing a crime, so it is better not to even try.”

Below is a Q&A with Attorney Nam.

-In this case, how was the victim of employment fraud identified as the voice phishing manager?

▲The defendant is a victim who had his passport taken away and imprisoned locally after being deceived by the words ‘highly profitable translation part-time job.’ The only basis for the prosecution's indictment was 'IP address'. The IP used to access the voice phishing malicious program server matches the IP used by the defendant to access his personal financial account. Based on this, the prosecution viewed the defendant as a key manager of a criminal organization that directly managed the server and requested 10 years in prison.

- The part that focuses on defending the suspect.

▲We focused on digging into the technical blind spots that the investigative agency had missed. First, the uniqueness of the local network environment in Southeast Asia was emphasized. In places such as Laos, hundreds of people use a method of sharing one public IP (CGNAT). Therefore, it could not be concluded that it was the defendant's terminal based solely on the IP address match. Additionally, the defendant only had about 8 months of experience working as a development assistant in the local area. It was strongly expressed in court from the beginning that it was technically impossible to directly manage a malicious program server that requires advanced security technology.

-What is the specific basis for the first trial court’s decision to all be found not guilty?

▲There are three main things. First, this is the initial statement left at the embassy immediately after escaping. The 'raw truth', written only to survive without legal calculations, became a decisive shield to break the prosecution's logic of collusion. Second is the composition of the local organization. Since most of the members were Chinese, it was difficult to view it as a voice phishing organization that required fluent Korean. Thirdly, there is a lack of objective evidence. As a result of the investigative agency's forensics, no malicious programs were found on the defendant's electronic device.

-What is the fundamental reason why innocent perpetrators repeatedly occur in Southeast Asia?

▲This is because it has the characteristics of ‘large-scale human trafficking’ that exploits the desperation of young people. They are lured overseas with high profits, and as soon as they arrive there, their passports are taken away and they are imprisoned in a space cut off from the outside world. Young people who lack social experience have no choice but to succumb to this extreme violence and pressure. However, investigative agencies only focus on the results of 'being at the crime scene' and ignore the structural violence as to why they were unable to escape from there. The limitations of these superficial investigations are what cause wronged victims to turn into perpetrators overnight.

-What is the response strategy depending on the damage situation when involved in an overseas voice phishing incident?

▲The key is where to focus the argument. If you are a simple participant, you must prove that you were a low-level assistant who only received a fixed salary and not a profit share. On the other hand, in cases where the person was forcibly taken away by coercion, as in this case, it is necessary to secure as much as possible the 'initial statement' before legal calculations are involved, such as the embassy rescue request letter mentioned above.

Reporter Kwon Byeong-seok (bsk730@fnnews.com)

[View full article]
“Strategy when involved in a high-paying part-time job in Southeast Asia”... How to respond to a suspect whose 10-year sentence was overturned (link)