CONTENTS
- 1. The Client Who Reached Out to the Suwon Attorney's Office
- - How the Client Came to Reach Out to the Suwon Attorney's Office
- 2. Relevant Statutes for the Case, Explained by the Suwon Attorney's Office
- 3. Assistance Provided by the Suwon Attorney's Office
- - Suwon Attorney's Office's Argument 1 | No Personal Use
- - Suwon Attorney's Office's Argument 2 | Payment Forthcoming
- - Suwon Attorney's Office's Argument 3 | Loss of Professorship
- 4. The Result of the Suwon Attorney's Office's Assistance: “Non-Referral”
- - The Suwon Attorney's Office's Case Review
1. The Client Who Reached Out to the Suwon Attorney's Office
The client, who had been reported after using workers' insurance premiums for personal purposes rather than paying them, came to the Suwon office and requested a consultation with an attorney.
How the Client Came to Reach Out to the Suwon Attorney's Office
The account of the client, who consulted with the Suwon attorney, is as follows.
The client is a professor at a private university and at the same time runs a corporation aimed at product development.
As the representative director of the corporation, the client had an obligation to pay the four major insurance premiums to the National Health Insurance Service and the National Pension Service.
However, the client failed to pay the insurance premiums of the company's employees and recently received notice to undergo investigation on an embezzlement charge.
Fearing punishment, the client came to the Suwon attorney's office to seek legal advice and requested assistance from the police investigation stage onward.
Issues in the Case
The client faced punishment for embezzlement for failing to pay the insurance premiums withheld from the employees' wages.
In particular, given the nature of the client's occupation as a university professor, the client could lose the professorship if sentenced to a fine or a heavier penalty.
The Suwon attorney therefore developed a strategy and prepared a response so that the client could receive a non-referral decision.
2. Relevant Statutes for the Case, Explained by the Suwon Attorney's Office
Embezzlement is punishable by imprisonment for not more than five years or a fine not exceeding 15 million won.
The same penalty also applies when a person who administers another's affairs, through an act in breach of that duty, obtains a financial benefit or causes a third party to obtain one, causing loss to the principal.
Because this charge is likely to proceed through investigation under detention out of concern that the misappropriated property may be concealed elsewhere or used up, the help of an attorney experienced in this area can be helpful.
■ Embezzlement (when a person who keeps another's property embezzles it or refuses to return it)
-> Imprisonment for not more than five years or a fine not exceeding 15 million won
■ Occupational Embezzlement (when embezzlement is committed in breach of occupational duties)
-> Imprisonment for not more than ten years or a fine not exceeding 30 million won
3. Assistance Provided by the Suwon Attorney's Office
Through consultation with the client, the Suwon attorney reviewed the facts of the case in detail.
The attorney then gathered sentencing factors that could work in the client's favor and made the following arguments.
Suwon Attorney's Office's Argument 1 | No Personal Use
The attorney emphasized that the client had been unable to pay the insurance premiums because of management difficulties, such as the new product development being abandoned partway through, and that the client had not diverted the funds for personal use or used them unlawfully.
Suwon Attorney's Office's Argument 2 | Payment Forthcoming
The client fully acknowledges the wrongdoing and has shown deep remorse.
The attorney emphasized that the client intends to pay the unpaid insurance premiums by selling company assets and using personal funds.
Suwon Attorney's Office's Argument 3 | Loss of Professorship
If the client were to be sentenced to a fine of 3 million won or more in this case, there is a risk that the client would have to leave the professorship.
Taking into account these disadvantages that the client could face, the Suwon attorney earnestly requested that the client be shown the greatest possible leniency and granted a non-referral decision.
4. The Result of the Suwon Attorney's Office's Assistance: “Non-Referral”
Accepting the Suwon attorney's office's arguments, the police issued a non-referral decision in this case.
Satisfied with the result, the client came to the Suwon office and repeatedly expressed thanks to the attorneys.
The Suwon Attorney's Office's Case Review
The client had been reported for embezzlement and faced the prospect of a severe penalty, but with the assistance of the Suwon attorney the client received a non-referral decision and was able to avoid punishment.
As this case shows, if you are implicated in a criminal matter involving embezzlement, there is a risk of being sentenced to a custodial term, so the assistance of an attorney experienced in this area can be helpful.
Daeryun Law Firm thoroughly analyzes the client's situation, establishes a legal response strategy based on the evidence, and provides tailored assistance from the police investigation through to trial.
If you are facing difficulties in a situation such as the one above, please reach out to the Suwon attorney's office at any time to entrust your case.
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.
