CONTENTS
- 1. Bucheon Attorney | Background of the Case
- - A Client Deceived by a Loan Broker
- - Booked on Charges of Being an Accomplice in Loan Fraud
- 2. Bucheon Attorney | Case Analysis
- - Introduction to Relevant Precedents
- 3. Bucheon Attorney | Content of the Pleadings
- - There Was No Intent to Defraud
- - Faithfully Repaying the Loan
- 4. Bucheon Attorney | Acquittal Ultimately Obtained
1. Bucheon Attorney | Background of the Case
The client needed quick cash and, on a acquaintance's recommendation, was introduced to a loan broker and received about 200 million won in loans from a commercial bank.
However, the client was later implicated in a socially controversial loan fraud case and was booked as an accomplice.
A Client Deceived by a Loan Broker
The client followed the guidance of the loan broker in order to obtain a loan, but in the process was wrongly suspected of having an intent to defraud with respect to the loan.
In fact, the client took out the loan to repay existing debt, and proceeded with the loan through lawful procedures in accordance with the broker's consulting.
Because the loan was disbursed by a commercial bank through proper loan procedures, the client had doubts about how he came to be booked as an accomplice.
Booked on Charges of Being an Accomplice in Loan Fraud
The prosecution suspected that the client had participated as an accomplice in loan fraud together with the loan broker and indicted him.
However, the client argued that he had no intent to swindle or defraud with respect to the loan and that he had merely sought to repay his existing debt through a low-interest loan.
The client denied the charge of being an accomplice in fraud, based on the fact that he had sufficient intent and ability to repay the loan, that he had obtained the loan lawfully, and that he had repaid it properly thereafter.
In response, the Bucheon attorney at Daeryun Law Firm analyzed the case as follows in order to resolve the client's unfair situation.
2. Bucheon Attorney | Case Analysis
The Bucheon attorney reviewed the relevant legal principles to prove that the client had no involvement in the alleged offense, and cited precedent to emphasize that there had been no intent to deceive.
The attorney also clarified the truth of the case by establishing that the client was, in fact, himself a victim.
The elements of the crime of fraud are as follows.
Criminal Act, Article 347 (Fraud) |
A person who deceives another and takes delivery of property or obtains a pecuniary benefit Imprisonment for not more than 10 years or a fine not exceeding 20 million won |
<🔗Establishment of the Crime of Fraud Elements>
Deception | Distorting facts or omitting important information so as to induce a mistaken judgment |
Pecuniary Benefit | An unjust monetary benefit obtained through deception, or a loss suffered by the victim |
Intent and Premeditation | A need to prove clear intent and a prior plan, rather than a mere mistake |
Effect on the Victim's Decision | A significant influence on the decision that affects the victim's actual intention |
Repetition and Maliciousness | If there is repetition of similar conduct or a situation with a large social impact, the punishment may be aggravated |
Introduction to Relevant Precedents
Precedent | Content |
Principle of Good Faith and Duty to Disclose 98Do3263, 2003Do4531, 2005Do8645 | In the case of deception by omission, where it is clear under the rules of experience in ordinary transactions that the other party would not have engaged in the conduct had it known the fact, a legal duty to disclose that fact is recognized |
Non-Recognition of a Deceptive Act for Breach of the Duty to Disclose 2014Do2754 | A breach of the duty to disclose in an insurance contract provided under the Commercial Act does not, as a matter of course, constitute the crime of fraud, and it is recognized as an intentional deceptive act only when it reaches the extent of harming the essence |
3. Bucheon Attorney | Content of the Pleadings
The Bucheon attorney made the following pleadings in order to argue the client's innocence.
In particular, citing relevant precedent, the attorney asserted that the client had no intent to defraud from the outset and was faithfully repaying the loan.
There Was No Intent to Defraud
The attorney argued that the client's purpose in taking out the loan was merely to repay existing debt and that there was no intent or deliberation to defraud with respect to the loan.
The attorney also emphasized that the client was faithfully performing his obligation to repay the loan and that there was no 'deceptive act' or 'intent to defraud' required for the crime of fraud to be committed.
Faithfully Repaying the Loan
After receiving the loan, the client repaid his existing debt and continued to repay the loan faithfully.
This proved that, rather than having an intent to defraud with respect to the loan, the client was repaying it faithfully on the basis of trust.
The attorney also explained that the client had lawfully entered into the loan agreement with the financial institution to repay the loan, and that this was unrelated to fraud.
4. Bucheon Attorney | Acquittal Ultimately Obtained
The Bucheon attorney proved that the client was not guilty and argued that the client was in fact a victim who was unaware of the matter, ultimately obtaining a judgment of acquittal.
In this case, a client who was wrongly implicated as an accomplice in a loan fraud case 🔗Bucheon Attorney Recommendation and proceeded with a legal review together with the Bucheon attorney, obtaining a judgment of acquittal.
If you become involved in a 🔗financial fraud case like this, you may face a criminal trial contrary to your intentions and find yourself in difficulty, so we recommend preparing a response strategy with a criminal attorney at Daeryun Law Firm through a 🔗legal consultation booking.
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.
