Press Coverage

Medical staff who were being investigated by the police for neglecting an emergency patient hospitalized in a nursing hospital, resulting in death, were cleared of charges. According to the police on the 11th, the Gwangju Police Agency recently decided not to transfer four medical staff, including Mr. A, who was suspected of causing death due to professional negligence. Previously, in 2023, a patient in his 60s, Mr. B, died at a nursing hospital in Gwangju Metropolitan City. At the time, the bereaved family said that Mr. B was killed by food. A complaint was submitted to the investigative agency, claiming that the medical staff did not take proper emergency measures such as CPR in a suffocating situation. The medical staff denied the charges, saying that Mr. B was already in cardiac arrest when they found him. They administered first aid, including oxygen administration, but claimed that they were unable to perform CPR due to a DNR (denial of life-sustaining treatment) consent form written by the patient's guardian. The police determined that they were not guilty. "It is entirely possible that the victim died of suffocation. "It is difficult to rule it out, but considering that the victim had findings such as arteriosclerosis in some parts of the cardiovascular system and that more strain is usually placed on the heart during the digestion process after a meal, the possibility of sudden cardiac death appears to be the highest." He added, "I believe that the medical staff can declare a victim with a DNR consent form dead considering his condition at the time," adding, "It was difficult for the suspects to predict the victim's cardiac arrest, and it cannot be said that there was negligence in medical practice such as first aid." This was elaborated. Attorney Kim Cheol of Daeryun Law Firm, who represented Mr. A, explained, "According to precedents, DNR status means that if pulmonary or cardiac arrest unexpectedly occurs during treatment, death is accepted without performing CPR. If high-intensity pressure is applied for CPR despite a DNR consent form, it is compulsory treatment against the patient's will and may amount to assault or injury." Jeong Eui-jin (jej88@ikbc.co.kr)[View full article] The medical staff was 'not guilty' for causing the patient's death by failing to provide first aid.. Why? (Shortcut)

Panax Japan selects Daeryun as an advisor for its expansion into Korea... Daeryun Law Firm, which provides advisory services such as review of content industry regulations, “Provides solutions tailored to the characteristics of companies and industries in each country... We will become a global investment partner” Daeryun Law Firm is attracting attention from the industry as it is expanding its influence as a ‘global business partner’ that helps overseas companies enter the domestic market. According to Daeryun Law Firm, Japanese digital content distributor ‘Panax Japan’ signed a legal advisory contract with Daeryun Law Firm last month. Previously, Panax Japan submitted a letter of intent for investment worth 10 billion won to Goyang-si, Gyeonggi-do in June 2024 and began entering the domestic content market in earnest. Panax Japan selected Daeryun Law Firm, which has a high level of understanding of the global corporate advisory and content industry, as the final advisor among the many legal advisors that signed an MOU with Goyang City at the time. Daeryun Law Firm provided a wide range of legal services, including review of content industry regulations, copyright law and business-related licensing advice, during the advisory process for Panax Japan's Foreign Investment Company (FDI), helping to enable smooth domestic business activities. Daeryun Law Firm like this. While running the customs and international trade group, he is actively helping overseas companies advance into Korea. Multi-disciplinary experts belonging to the customs and international trade group, including lawyers, tax accountants, labor attorneys, and customs experts, received attention by providing actionable services that go beyond legal advice and come up with practical solutions. Specifically, they provide comprehensive consulting ranging from professional interpretation and advice on foreign investment-related laws such as the Foreign Exchange Transactions Act, Foreign Investment Promotion Act, and Restriction of Special Taxation Act, as well as local government licensing, tax reduction, and design of cooperation structures with domestic partners. In particular, Daeryun Law Firm is strengthening its global network by promoting the opening of an office in New York, USA, in the second half of this year, so it is possible to respond more flexibly in communication and collaboration with overseas foreign companies. Kim Kuk-il, CEO of Daeryun Law Firm, said, “Foreign companies entering the domestic market is a comprehensive project that requires an understanding of complex systems and practical design,” and added, “Daeryun is a partner that opens the door to global investment in Korea by providing customized legal solutions tailored to the characteristics and industrial groups of companies in each country.” He said, “I am playing my role.” Law Leader Reporter Son Dong-wook twson@lawleader.co.kr Law Leader - Daeryun Law Firm takes a leap forward as a global business partner...All-round support for overseas companies entering the domestic market (Go here) Sejeong Ilbo - Daeryun Law Firm focuses on all-round support for overseas companies entering Korea (Go here) Seoul Shinmun - Daeryun Law Firm advised ‘Panax Japan’ on its domestic expansion… “Leap forward as a partner for foreign companies” (Shortcut)

While there have been cases in the United States where the act of profiting by investing in another company's stocks based on the company's internal information was judged to be insider trading and fined, there are voices calling for related regulatory measures in our law as well. Under the current law, insider trading is limited to cases of trading the company's own stocks. Accordingly, if a case like the US case occurs in Korea, there will be limits to sanctions and it may have a negative impact on the fairness and reliability of the capital market. The legal community points out that legislative supplementation is needed to expand the scope of insider trading. Betting on a rise in competitors' stock prices... U.S. court imposes three times fine for unjust enrichment What sparked the discussion surrounding the scope of insider trading was the so-called 'shadow insider trading' case that occurred in the United States. Shadow insider trading refers to the act of making profits by purchasing stocks of other companies based on the company's undisclosed internal information. Previously, in 2016, Matthew Panuwert, an executive at the biopharmaceutical company Medivation, heard internal information that large pharmaceutical company Pfizer was pursuing the acquisition of Medivation, and purchased options to bet on the rise in the stock price of competitors whose movements were linked to the company's stock price. The Securities and Exchange Commission (SEC) determined that Panuwat's actions constituted insider trading. Last September, the court accepted the SEC's argument and imposed a fine equivalent to three times the amount of unjust enrichment on Panuwat. However, as Hoban Group recently purchased a stake in LS, interest in shadow insider trading has increased in Korea as well. Hoban purchased shares while the subsidiaries of both companies were engaged in a lawsuit. The stock of the other party in the lawsuit was purchased. In addition, when the stock price jumped due to a partial ruling in favor of an LS subsidiary, which would ultimately be good news for Hoban, suspicions were raised that the stock was traded using internal information. “Explicit legal regulations are needed... uncertainty must be resolved” The legal community agreed that although it is difficult to view the Hoban case as shadow insider trading, laws to regulate such cases are needed to ensure a fair trading order. Attorney Kwon Mun-gyu of the law firm Space and Gil said, “Shadow insider trading is unfair trading in a state of unequal information,” and added, “Because criminal punishment is difficult under the current Capital Market Act and the provisions on the basis for other regulations are somewhat insufficient, legislative efforts to resolve this seem necessary.” Ahn Hee-cheol, the representative attorney at DL Law Firm, also said, "Shadow insider trading is a new form of unfair trading that can avoid existing insider trading regulations." He added, "We need to expand the regulatory scope of insider trading and explicitly stipulate it in the Capital Markets Act to resolve legal uncertainty." Weight was also placed on the possibility of related discussions taking place. Seungmin Lee, a lawyer at Seum Law Firm, said, "Korea's capital market law has been greatly influenced by the U.S. securities law, so if precedents such as the Panuwert case that punish shadow insider trading are established in the U.S., related discussions will inevitably continue in Korea." Cho Young-gon, a lawyer at Daeryun Law Firm, said, "Considering the recent attitudes of financial authorities and prosecutors and the direction of system improvement, there is room to discuss the creation of new punishment provisions or revision of legal provisions with the need for punishment in mind. In this process, it is necessary to analyze the impact of undisclosed information on the stock price of the industry as a whole and suspected cases of use of inside information that affect the industry as a whole." However, the key during the discussion process is to clarify the standards for shadow insider trading. Attorney Lee said, "The U.S. case was a case where insider trading was expanded to include trading the stocks of another company that is economically related (sharing market connection) using undisclosed information of one company. Since the term 'economically connected' is quite vague and can be interpreted broadly, if it is not defined accurately, there is a risk that trading in the stocks of competitors or affiliates will be unfairly restricted." Reporter Park Seon-woo (closely@bloter.net)[View full article] [Shadow Internal Transactions] ③ Legal profession calls for regulation due to threats to the capital market [Numbers] (Shortcut)

Community legal information communication and collaboration officially launched. Legal content joint planning and production system officially launched. On the 11th, Korea Local Journalists Club (KLJC) and Daeryun Law Firm (Yuhan) signed a business agreement to officially launch a legal content joint planning and production system closely linked to the local community in order to provide practical and professional legal information to citizens across the country. The business agreement signing ceremony was attended by Kim Kuk-il, CEO of Daeryun Law Firm, and working-level staff, and from the Korea Regional Journalists Club, Chairman Son Kyun-geun, Chairman Lee Ki-dong (Daegu Newspaper Seoul Reporting Department Head), Kang Byeong-woon, Mudeung Ilbo Seoul Reporting Department Head and Director, Baek Joo-hee, Ulsan Maeil Newspaper/UTV Political Department Reporter, Kim Doo-soo, Gyeongsang Ilbo Seoul Headquarters and Director, and Chungbuk Ilbo Headquarters Choi Dae-man. We attended and discussed specific action plans for the future. This agreement is centered on connecting lawyers from Daeryun Law Firm (Limited) with reporters from member companies of the Korea Local Journalists Club (KLJC) to regularly provide essential legal information to local residents. Through this MOU, the two sides agreed to promote multi-faceted collaboration, including healthy development of the legal service industry, expansion of services to the public, cooperation in enacting and amending laws for autonomy, decentralization and balanced development, and legal, tax and accounting advice for members of the Korea Regional Journalists Club. “Legal information is the social foundation that protects citizens’ rights,” said Kim Kuk-il, CEO of Daeryun Law Firm (Law), adding, “By combining Daeryun Law Firm (Law) Limited’s global mega law firm system with the network of the Korea Local Journalists Club (KLJC), we will contribute to bridging regional gaps and ensuring that anyone can receive professional help.” Lee Ki-dong, president of the Korea Regional Journalists Club, gave meaning to this, saying, “We have created a decisive turning point in which local media can go beyond simply delivering news and provide legal information that is closely related to the daily lives of residents.” The two organizations plan to hold quarterly planning meetings in the future to select regionally tailored topics and sequentially expand content such as conflict case explanations, lifestyle Q&A, online and offline lectures, and seminars. Through this, we plan to continue to expand close legal service contact points with the local community beyond simple information delivery and strengthen cooperative relationships with the common goal of establishing an 'environment where everyone can receive high-quality legal services fairly.' Meanwhile, Daeryun Law Firm (Limited), founded in 2016, has established a 'global mega law firm' model that connects 41 branch offices across the country into a single integrated system centered on its headquarters in Seoul. The Korea Local Journalists Club (KLJC) is a non-profit media organization launched in July 2012, and its members include senior reporters working at 42 regional daily newspapers across the country.[View full article] Wikitree - Korea Regional Media Inc. - Daeryun Law Firm (Limited), signed a business agreement (Go here) Gwangju Daily Newspaper - Korea Regional Journalists Club and Daeryun Law Firm signed an MOU (link) Chungbuk Ilbo - Korea Local Journalists Club (KLJC) and Law Firm (Lihan) and Daeryun, business agreement (link) Daegu Newspaper - Korea Regional Journalists Club and Daeryun Law Firm signed an MOU “Providing practical legal information to local residents” (link) Gyeongsang Ilbo - KLJC and Daeryun Law Firm MOU signed (link)

Acting as an agent as if he were not the owner... Even the senior deposit was false. The court said, "There are no measures to recover the damage... We need to be severely punished." A building owner who committed a lease fraud by hiding the debt and pretending to be an agent was sentenced to prison. On the 1st of last month, the Jinju Branch of the Changwon District Court sentenced Mr. A, in his 40s, to 2 years and 6 months in prison, who was indicted on charges of fraud. Mr. A, who was the owner of the building, was incapable of repaying the lease deposit due to a mortgage debt. He was accused of stealing about 400 million won in deposits from five tenants, including Mr. B, over a period of about a year starting in 2021. As a result of the investigation, it was revealed that Mr. A had entered into a lease agreement as an agent by appointing a third party as the landlord, and had falsely notified the senior deposit in the process. During the trial, Mr. A countered that some buildings had sufficient collateral value, so even if he had notified the senior deposit less, it did not constitute fraud. The court sentenced Mr. A to prison. sentenced. The court said, “Even if the appraised value of the building is sufficient, the actual successful bid price may be much lower through the auction process,” and “The fact that the defendant reduced the senior deposit amount and notified it itself proves that there was an assessment that the collateral value was insufficient.” He continued, “The amount of damage exceeds 400 million won, and no measures have been taken to recover the damage.” He added, “There is a need to severely punish him for some crimes because he denies the facts of the indictment.” He added. Lee Seong-cheol, a lawyer at Daeryun Law Firm who represented Mr. B in this case, explained, “Some of the victims, including Mr. B, suffered great difficulties as they were defrauded at a time when they were just starting out in society and had to settle down. Based on Mr. A’s mortgage and other debts, we were able to obtain a prison sentence by proving that he had no intention or ability to return the money from the time of the contract.” Reporter Kim Jong-cheol (jckim99@sportsseoul.com)[View full article] The building owner committed rent fraud by hiding the debt... 2 years and 6 months in prison (link)

The relocation of the ‘network law firm’ is in the midst of a de facto reorganization of the lawyer’s private office industry… The damage is entirely borne by legal consumers. The legal profession says, “We need to stop promoting the idea that an organized response is possible.” One of the emerging topics in the legal world recently is ‘network law firms.’ This is because it is the only one showing rapid growth in the stagnant legal market. Daeryun and YK are considered leaders in network law firms. YK solidified its position as a large law firm last year, recording sales of more than 150 billion won. Last year, Daeryun also entered the top 10 law firms with sales exceeding 100 billion won just 9 years after its establishment. Network law firms mainly advocate a ‘one-firm system.’ Although we have branch offices in various regions across the country, all matters related to the operation of the law firm are collectively managed by the main office. Profit is also shared by all members in a certain ratio. They are also active in marketing, investing a considerable amount of money in advertising costs. Therefore, criticism is being raised within the industry that these law firms are sweeping away all cases in small regions. Before the advent of network law firms, so-called ‘separate law firms’ were making waves in the industry. The separate accounting system is operated in such a way that each lawyer, even if belonging to the same law firm, receives profits as if he were an independent sole proprietor. In fact, it can be seen as close to a private office as only common expenses such as office rent and employee wages are shared. Cases are also handled individually by each office. It is pointed out that in Korea, the term network law firm is used without a clear definition, and in reality, separate law firms are recognized as the same category, which may pose unnecessary risks to customers. An official from a network law firm said, “The Korean legal community still lacks understanding of the structure of global law firms, and some law firms call themselves a network with 2-3 branch offices and only online advertisements, and in fact operate in a separate system system.” “Only a very small number of companies have established a global mega law firm-type structure that allows for quality control on a nationwide basis,” he explained. Contrary to the appearance of a prosperous law firm, in reality, it is run by individual lawyers handling the cases they take on alone. This is why there are concerns that the absence of a case management and collaboration system may lead to a decline in the quality of legal services. There are also cases that clearly demonstrate the problems of separate law firms. This is the so-called ‘trial no-show case’, which became controversial when a lawyer who worked at Byeolsanje Law Firm failed to attend the trial after serving as legal representative for the family of a school violence victim. The victim's family received a partial ruling in favor of the case in the first trial, but due to the lawyer's continued non-appearance, the result was eventually overturned in the appellate court as a 'loss'. As the case became controversial, the law firm that the lawyer was affiliated with issued a statement and quickly drew a line, saying, "The lawyer in question has withdrawn from the main office and has absolutely nothing to do with our branch office." In the end, it is pointed out that due to this type of law firm operation, the damage is borne entirely by the customer. A legal industry official said, “It would be absurd for legal consumers if the place they went to expecting high-quality service actually had less system than a private office.” He continued, “As related disputes are increasing, an internal self-purification process is needed in the industry.” He added, “It appears that sanctions are needed for the practice of deceiving consumers by claiming that an organized response is possible despite the separate system.” Reporter Park Jae-gwan (paksunbi@fnnews.com)[View full article] A law firm with a lot of patterns... We must be wary of ‘Byulsanje’ (Shortcut)

Concerns about financial accidents are growing as customer personal information was recently leaked due to the SK Telecom SIM hacking incident. As the scale of information leaks is expected to reach up to 25 million, the possibility of sim swapping using SIM information, creating cloned phones, and stealing text messages or financial authentication information is being raised. Since mobile phones are used as the most important authentication medium in non-face-to-face financial transactions, there is a high possibility that hackers will abuse them for electronic financial transaction fraud. In particular, with the revitalization of Fin-Tech, which combines finance and technology, most financial transactions are currently conducted non-face-to-face. Therefore, the financial industry is often a major target for hackers targeting security vulnerabilities. In fact, non-face-to-face financial accidents appear to occur frequently. For example, in the case of voice phishing, the National Police Agency estimated last year that the total damage amount was KRW 854.5 billion, and the damage per person was approximately KRW 41 million, which is a 91% and 73% increase respectively from the previous year. So who is responsible for non-face-to-face financial incidents such as smishing, pharming, and phishing? To explain this part, we must first look at the legal basis. Pursuant to Article 21 of the Electronic Financial Transactions Act (Obligation to Secure Safety), financial companies, etc. must exercise the utmost care as good managers to ensure that electronic financial transactions are processed safely, and are obligated to comply with the standards set by the Financial Services Commission in relation to the information technology sector and electronic financial services, such as manpower, facilities, and electronic devices for electronic transmission or processing, to ensure the safety and reliability of electronic financial transactions. In addition, in accordance with Article 9 of the same Act, financial companies, etc. are required to comply with the standards set by the Financial Services Commission in relation to electronic financial services, including manpower, facilities, and electronic devices for electronic transmission or processing, to ensure the safety and reliability of electronic financial transactions. If damage occurs to a user due to an accident that occurs during the electronic transmission or processing of a contract or transaction instruction, or an accident that occurs due to the use of an access medium obtained by false or other illegal means by intruding into an electronic device or information and communication network for electronic financial transactions, the user is responsible for compensating for the damage. In other words, unless there is intentional or gross negligence on the part of the user, in principle, the financial company must compensate the user for any damages incurred. What should be done if a non-face-to-face financial accident actually occurs? First, you can report or consult with the Telecommunications Financial Fraud Integrated Reporting and Response Center (112) or apply for damage relief to the relevant financial company. In urgent cases, you can apply by phone and submit the documents later. Once the financial company receives the application, the account will be suspended from payment, and if any damages still remain in the account, procedures will be taken to refund the victim. If you report a financial fraud to the police and obtain an incident confirmation certificate detailing the date, time, and amount of damage, you can use it as evidence or explanatory material in future procedures. You can also consider seeking punishment for criminals from the investigative agency through a criminal complaint. Naturally, the biggest concern from the victim's point of view is recovering the amount of damage. Based on the agreement with the Financial Supervisory Service, first-tier financial institutions will implement 'non-face-to-face financial accident responsibility sharing standards' from 2024 and second-tier financial institutions will implement 'non-face-to-face financial accident liability sharing standards' from 2025, and they will independently calculate the liability ratio for damages and provide corresponding compensation to users. It is also possible to apply for dispute mediation to the Financial Dispute Mediation Committee of the Financial Supervisory Service. For example, in 2022, the committee acknowledged the negligence of a financial institution in suspending payments for voice phishing and decided to compensate for the full amount of causal damage. It is also possible to file a lawsuit against a financial company claiming damages under the Electronic Financial Transactions Act, or to file a lawsuit to confirm the non-existence of debt for an identity theft loan that was not made against the person's will. In relation to this, there have been a number of recent precedents in lower courts favoring the victims. However, the best way is to prevent damage in advance. Do not click on links included in text messages unless you trust the source, and make efforts to regularly remove malware and viruses using security or anti-virus programs. Financial accidents can be largely prevented by using the mobile phone identity theft prevention service of the Korea Association for Information and Communications Technology (KAIT) or, if your personal information has been exposed, by registering it with the Financial Supervisory Service's Personal Information Exposure Accident Prevention System. If actual financial transactions due to identity theft are confirmed or suspected, you can also suspend payments in your name at the Korea Financial Telecommunications and Clearings & Clearings Institute Account Information Integrated Management Service (Account Info) or report your credit cards as lost all at once. It is possible. Account Info also provides a safe blocking service for non-face-to-face account openings, which can prevent additional opening of identity theft accounts. Small and Medium Business Team[View full article] Phishing and smishing rampant... Damages from non-face-to-face financial accidents, what are the responsibilities and solutions? (Shortcut)

A woman in her 70s who was brought to trial on charges of stealing cash from an acquaintance's bank account was found not guilty. The Daejeon District Court's Cheonan Branch acquitted person A, in her 70s, who was indicted on charges of computer fraud and theft last May. Person A was accused of secretly taking out a bank account from an acquaintance B's bag and withdrawing 700,000 won in July of last year. The prosecution also charged Mr. A with fraud based on the fact that Mr. A borrowed 3.5 million won from Mr. B even though he had no ability to repay. Mr. A completely denied the charges. He claimed that it was true that he borrowed money, but that he never stole the bank account. He emphasized that Mr. B handed him his bankbook, allowed him to withdraw money, and also gave him his password. The court ruled in Mr. A's favor. The court ruled, "Considering that Mr. A has repeatedly made financial transactions with Mr. B in the past and has repaid them within the promised period, it is difficult to say that he deceived Mr. B into a mistake." He added, "Mr. A not only repaid the entire amount of the loan, but also repaid it with interest in addition to the principal. Considering all the circumstances, including the call history between the two, it appears that Mr. B was also fully aware that the transaction was a routine financial transaction." Attorney Kim Dong-gu of Daeryun Law Firm (Lihan), who represented him, explained, "Mr. A had a history of borrowing and repaying a total of about 10 million won from Mr. B over the past 10 years, and in this case as well, he submitted in detail related call recordings, remittance details, text messages related to repayment, etc. to prove that there were actual financial transactions." He added, "This had a positive effect on the court's judgment and was able to lead to a not guilty verdict." Reporter Jeong-won Hwang (jwhwang@mt.co.kr)[View full article] When you don't lend money, 'I take my bank account and run away'... Man in his 70s found not guilty on charges of theft and fraud (link)

Changwon District Court upholds the plaintiff's claim in full. The court ruled that if the contractor had entered into a joint guarantee with the contractor at the time of signing the construction contract, the contractor must repay the amount that the contractor failed to pay to the supplier. The purpose is that the contract takes effect for repayment and requires a joint obligation. On the 9th of last month, the Changwon District Court ruled in favor of the plaintiff, as in the original trial, in the appeal trial of the product payment claim lawsuit filed by company A, a ready-mix concrete supply partner, against two companies, including company B, the construction project orderer. Previously, company A signed a contract with a construction company in July 2022 to supply ready-mix concrete worth about 120 million won. In this process, Company A requested a joint guarantee from the construction company. Accordingly, company B, the ordering company, promised to guarantee the ready-mix concrete debt. However, the conflict began when the construction company did not pay 82 million won in construction fees to company A. Accordingly, Company A filed a lawsuit against Company B, which provided joint guarantee with the construction company. They argued that if the construction company cannot afford to repay the debt, Company B, the joint guarantor, should also be held responsible. However, Company B countered that it was not responsible. All construction costs have already been paid to the construction company. Company B emphasized, “Even though Company A was aware of the construction company’s inability to pay, it did not notify us of this situation,” and added, “Therefore, it cannot be jointly and severally liable.” The first trial court upheld all of Company A’s payment claims. The court ruled, "The ready-mix concrete price was paid in part on two occasions. As the defendant claims, there is no basis for admitting that the plaintiff knew in advance about the construction company's financial deterioration situation," and "Therefore, we do not accept the defendant's claim." Company B, which was dissatisfied with the first trial ruling, immediately appealed, but the appellate court also ruled in favor of company A. Attorney Jong-hoon Han of Daeryun Law Firm, who represented company A, said, "According to Article 436-2 of the Civil Act, creditors are “If the main debtor fails to fulfill its obligations for more than three months after signing the guarantee contract, it must be notified without delay,” he explained. “However, in this case, the construction company paid part of the ready-mix concrete price twice, which resulted in a change in the notification obligation period.” He continued, “Company B claimed that Company A was negligent in its notification obligation, but since there was no data to determine when funds deteriorated, the defendant's claim was groundless because the notification obligation period could not be specified.” He added, “Because the construction company still has unpaid funds. “Company B, the joint guarantor, is still responsible, and both the first and second trials saw no change in joint liability, so the lawsuit was able to be concluded with the plaintiff’s victory.” Digital Content Team[View full article] Court: “Non-payment of goods… Joint guarantor must pay together” (Shortcut)

A man in his 40s who was put on trial on suspicion of stealing a locker key from a hospital was found not guilty. According to the legal community on the 9th, the Seoul Central District Court acquitted Mr. A, who was indicted on charges of theft on the 1st of last month. Mr. A was suspected of stealing the locker key of the hospital where he worked in 2023. The hospital claimed that Mr. A stole the master key that could open all lockers and that he did this to steal items from other employees. The hospital showed Mr. A relevant CCTV footage and asked him to return the key, but claimed that Mr. A refused. Mr. A denied the charges. He claimed that the item he possessed in the CCTV video was his USB stick and that he did not know the whereabouts of the key. The police investigating the case decided not to send the case, but the hospital raised an objection, and the prosecution decided that the charges were acceptable and summarily indicted Mr. A. Afterwards, the court ordered a summary fine of 700,000 won, but Mr. A objected and requested a formal trial. As a result of the formal trial, the court found Mr. A not guilty. Although the CCTV footage shows Mr. A taking a specific item, it was not visible what he had taken and it was not possible to accurately identify the item in his hand. In addition, after the key was lost, there was no data showing that items in Mr. A's locker were lost while he was working at the hospital, so he was acquitted. Attorney Kim Gwang-deok of the Daeryun Law Firm, who represented Mr. A, said, "In a criminal trial, admission of a crime must be proven by strict evidence. We were able to win the acquittal by emphasizing that the items in the CCTV were not clearly read and that no additional theft incidents occurred." Reporter Jeong Cheol-wook[View full article] A 40-year-old not guilty of stealing hospital locker keys... Court: “There is no clear evidence” (Shortcut)