Daeryun Law Firm Assistance Case | Client Charged with Embezzlement and Other Offenses, Non-Prosecution

The client was in charge of managing income and expenditure at a hair salon, recording daily sales and organizing expenses.

Then, while reviewing the salon's financial status, the salon owner discovered that a large sum was missing.

Finding this suspicious, the owner reported the client to the police on a charge of embezzlement.

The client, however, believed that they were not connected to the missing amount and that the problem had arisen from careless mistakes by other employees at the salon.

Nevertheless, the owner concluded that the client had embezzled approximately 500 million won.

In addition, the owner accused the client of fraud and embezzlement, alleging that the client had borrowed money in the past under the pretext of a deposit and had not repaid it.

Placed in a difficult position, the client requested help from Daeryun Law Firm in order to avoid punishment for 🔗embezzlement and breach of trust.

The complainant alleged that the client had embezzled an amount equal to the difference between the cash sales recorded on the salon's point-of-sale system and the amount deposited into the complainant's account.

However, there are numerous factors that can cause a discrepancy between the cash sales on the point-of-sale system and the final amount deposited into the complainant's account.

The attorney emphasized that, unless there was evidence proving that there had been no errors at all, it could not be concluded that the entire difference was embezzled money.

The complainant alleged that the client had asked to borrow money for an apartment deposit and had not repaid it despite being lent the money, so fraud should be recognized.

However, the complainant also acknowledged during the police investigation that 20 million won of the borrowed money had been repaid.

In addition, it could not be concluded that the client had no ability to repay, given that the client continued to work at the complainant's salon.

The attorney therefore emphasized that there was insufficient evidence to establish that the client had deceived the complainant as to the specific use of the borrowed money and the ability to repay.

The case above was one in which a client implicated in embezzlement and fraud charges concluded the matter promptly through a decision not to prosecute.

In embezzlement and fraud charges, proving intent and financial loss is central, and responding systematically from the early stages of the case is important.

At Daeryun, criminal attorneys with extensive experience handling a wide range of embezzlement cases collaborate with professionals from various fields to resolve cases.

If you are facing difficulties in a situation similar to the case above, you may request a consultation with a criminal attorney through 🔗legal consultation booking.