Page title background (PC version)Page title background (mobile version)

Deals & Cases

Occupational breach of trust

[Corporate Attorney Defense Case] Client Accused of Embezzlement After a Cancelled Corporate Merger Assisted Toward a Non-Prosecution Decision at the Prosecution Stage

The client came to a Daeryun corporate attorney after being accused of occupational embezzlement and breach of trust, following a problem that arose and led to the cancellation of a merger that had been pursued with M Corporation.

CONTENTS
  • 1. The Client Who Came to the Daeryun Corporate Attorney
    • - The Reason for M Corporation's Complaint, as Discovered by the Corporate Attorney
    • - Requesting the Corporate Attorney's Help to Respond to M Corporation's Complaint
  • 2. Corporate Attorney: “There Is No Problem with the Issuance of Tax Invoices”
    • - Reviewing the Statutes on Occupational Embezzlement and Breach of Trust with a Corporate Attorney
  • 3. Prosecution Accepts the Corporate Attorney's Argument and Renders a ‘Non-Prosecution’ Decision

1. The Client Who Came to the Daeryun Corporate Attorney

The client who requested a consultation from a Daeryun LLC corporate attorney regarding a charge of occupational embezzlement and breach of trust had already suffered a significant loss because of the other party.

The client was promised several hundred million won while pursuing a merger with M Corporation. However, M Corporation did not perform this, and the client, upon learning all the facts, cancelled the merger.

In the meantime, M Corporation, using the client's performance of work at an M Corporation branch as a pretext, proceeded to file a complaint for occupational embezzlement and breach of trust.

Having already suffered losses of several hundred million won because of M Corporation, the client, now drawn into a criminal case as well, urgently needed the assistance of a corporate attorney.

The corporate attorney committed to assisting so that the client could obtain a disposition of no suspicion of crime by arguing that the client had no intent of unlawful appropriation.

The Reason for M Corporation's Complaint, as Discovered by the Corporate Attorney

The client, charged with occupational embezzlement and breach of trust, needed to clear the criminal charge within a short period.

The client had already suffered losses of several hundred million won because of M Corporation and needed to continue the business to recover from it.

In the consultation with the corporate attorney, the client stated that the merger had fallen through because of M Corporation's failure to perform the agreement.

It was also confirmed that M Corporation, dissatisfied with this, had filed a retaliatory complaint against the client.

Requesting the Corporate Attorney's Help to Respond to M Corporation's Complaint

When the client faced the prospect of punishment for a crime the client had not even committed, the client came to our Daeryun corporate attorney and sought help.

The client did not receive the money promised while pursuing the merger with M Corporation, and the merger ultimately fell through.

Even so, M Corporation shifted all responsibility onto the client and went so far as to file a complaint for occupational embezzlement and breach of trust.

2. Corporate Attorney: “There Is No Problem with the Issuance of Tax Invoices”

Through careful consultation with the client, Daeryun Law Firm formed a corporate attorney team made up of multiple experts with extensive experience in occupational embezzlement and breach of trust cases.

The Daeryun corporate attorney team established that the merger had fallen through because the complainant had not performed the merger conditions, and that the accused had suffered a significant loss as a result.

The team then submitted materials rebutting the complainant's claims and requested that a non-prosecution decision be rendered in this case, on the ground that the accused had caused no harm to the complainant's company.

■ The complainant promised payment of money and other matters while pursuing the merger with the accused, but did not perform this, and the accused suffered a significant loss as a result.

■ The occupational embezzlement and breach of trust alleged by the complainant against the accused was confirmed never to have occurred.

■ It was determined that the accused had thoroughly performed the issuance of tax invoices and similar matters while transacting with the consigning company during employment at the complainant's company.

Reviewing the Statutes on Occupational Embezzlement and Breach of Trust with a Corporate Attorney

Together with a Daeryun corporate attorney, we will review the statutes related to occupational embezzlement and breach of trust.

Criminal Act, Article 355 (Embezzlement, Breach of Trust) (1) A person who, while keeping another's property, embezzles it or refuses to return it shall be punished by imprisonment for not more than 5 years or a fine not exceeding 15 million won.

(2) The same punishment as in the preceding paragraph shall apply to a person who, in handling another's affairs, obtains a pecuniary benefit or has a third party obtain it through conduct in breach of his or her duty, thereby causing loss to the principal.

Criminal Act, Article 356 (Occupational Embezzlement and Breach of Trust) A person who commits a crime under Article 355 in breach of his or her occupational duty shall be punished by imprisonment for not more than 10 years or a fine not exceeding 30 million won.

Criminal Act, Article 357 (Taking and Giving Property in Breach of Trust) (1) A person who, in handling another's affairs, receives an unlawful solicitation in connection with his or her duty and obtains property or a pecuniary benefit, or has a third party obtain it, shall be punished by imprisonment for not more than 5 years or a fine not exceeding 10 million won.

(2) A person who gives the property or pecuniary benefit referred to in paragraph (1) shall be punished by imprisonment for not more than 2 years or a fine not exceeding 5 million won.

(3) The property under paragraph (1) obtained by the offender or by a third party who is aware of the circumstances shall be confiscated. Where it is impossible to confiscate such property or where a pecuniary benefit has been obtained, the equivalent value shall be collected.

Criminal Act, Article 358 (Concurrent Imposition of Suspension of Qualifications) The crimes under the preceding three Articles may be subject to the concurrent imposition of suspension of qualifications for not more than 10 years.

Criminal Act, Article 359 (Attempts) An attempt to commit a crime under Articles 355 through 357 shall be punished.

3. Prosecution Accepts the Corporate Attorney's Argument and Renders a ‘Non-Prosecution’ Decision

The prosecution accepted the argument of the Daeryun Law Firm corporate attorney and rendered a non-prosecution decision regarding the suspect. The prosecution explained the reason for non-prosecution as ‘the suspect has no suspicion because the evidence is insufficient.’

The Corporate Legal Affairs Group at Daeryun Law Firm maintains specialized centers by field and forms teams of multiple legal experts, including attorneys and accountants, to handle cases successfully.

For the convenience of corporate clients, in-person consultations are also available, so if you need help, you may contact Daeryun at any time.

[기업변호사 방어사례] 기업 합병 취소 이후 횡령 고소 당한 의뢰인 조력해 검찰 단계 불기소

This content is based on actual case studies of Daeryun Law LLC with some adaptations, and the copyright belongs to our firm.
Unauthorized reproduction, duplication, or distribution and other copyright infringements may result in legal action under applicable laws.

Related Information
Background

Daeryun's Key Strengths

Daeryun's exclusive AI · IT
litigation strategies
Over 260
key members
1,200+ cases
handled monthly

* January 2026 Bar Association Transit Permit Issuance Criteria

*Complies with Korean Bar Association Advertising Regulations Article 4 Paragraph 1

Attorney
Legal consultation booking

All consultations are conducted by specialized lawyers after reviewing the case. It is carried out on a reservation basis to ensure a professional process.We encourage you to make an early reservation for consultation, and request adherence to the scheduled time. We will do our best to provide a satisfying consultation.

Phone
consultation 1800-7905

Available 24/7, 365 days
for consultation requests

Phone booking

KakaoTalk
consultation

KakaoTalk channel

Daeryun Law Firm Attorneys

KakaoTalk booking

Online
consultation

We provide tailored
legal services.

Online booking
Quick Menu

KakaoTalk