Busan Attorney | Busan Attorney Assists a Client With a Prior Fraud Record and Concludes With a Suspended Sentence

The Busan Attorney's client was charged with defrauding a business partner's representative (the victim) of approximately 300 million won by providing false information related to an order for railway insulation material.

The client deceived the victim by claiming that an older acquaintance of the client worked at the railway corporation and knew of a business partner, and that the client could take responsibility for the order, asking the victim to trust the client.

However, it turned out that none of the client's older acquaintances worked at the railway corporation, and this was revealed to be a clear lie intended to deceive the victim and defraud the victim of money.

The Busan Attorney's client deceived the victim with lies, pretending to enter into an order contract, and defrauded the victim of a total of approximately 300 million won by receiving the money.

This money was the total combined amount of harm, consisting of amounts paid as a deposit and payment for the supply of insulation material.

The victim grew suspicious that the client did not keep the news of the promised order contract or the order date, pressed the client, and eventually, when the fraudulent act was exposed, filed a criminal complaint for the crime of fraud.

The Busan Attorney's client used the money to pay off the client's own gambling debts.

However, the problem arose because the client had not borrowed the money from the victim on such a basis but had deceived the victim and defrauded the victim of the money.

After the fraud was discovered, the client was fired from the company and suffered hardship, with the client's livelihood rapidly deteriorating.

The Busan Attorney's client was ‘a person with a prior fraud record who was within the period of a suspended sentence.’

The client already had one prior fraud conviction, and by committing a fraud offense again during the suspension period of that sentence, the client faced the risk of serving an actual custodial sentence.

The Busan Attorney stated that whether the client deceived the victim intentionally and committed an act of fraud was important.

According to the client's statement, the client knew that the victim recently had to place an order with a railway company in relation to insulation material.

As a result, it was correct that the client had intentionally deceived the victim and defrauded the victim of money.

Since it was clear that the deception had been intentional, reaching a settlement with the victim was the most important step.

Moreover, because the amount defrauded was large, settling with the victim and even obtaining a statement of no desire for punishment would be favorable to the court's sentencing determination.

The Busan Attorney judged that it was important for the client to settle with the victim as much as possible.

The Busan Attorney first reviewed the client's list of assets and chose a method of repaying the victim by using land that the client held in the countryside as security.

In that way, the attorney provided the victim with the collateral and obtained a settlement agreement and a statement of no desire for punishment, assisting so that the matter could be favorable to the court's sentencing determination.

The Busan Attorney recognized that, given that the client had reoffended during the period of a suspended sentence, the possibility of an actual custodial sentence was very high.

However, the Busan criminal attorney emphasized the client's livelihood difficulties and efforts to remedy the harm and laid the grounds for leniency by devoting full effort to the victim's recovery from the harm.

The Busan Attorney actively led the settlement process with the victim and supported the recovery from the harm by making the fullest use of the assets remaining to the client.

As a result, the victim prepared a settlement agreement and a statement of no desire for punishment, and the Busan Attorney was able to encourage the court toward leniency.

The Busan Attorney's client was experiencing economic hardship due to the fraud charge.

The attorney emphasized that the client was living a reality the client could not bear, with billions of won in gambling debts that remained unpaid and the resulting hardship.

The Busan Attorney appealed for a suspended sentence, arguing that if the client were to serve an actual custodial sentence this time, it would be difficult for the remaining family to lead their lives fully, and so a suspended sentence should be granted for the sake of the client's family.