Seocho Law Firm Assistance Case | Wins a Lawsuit for the Return of a Cryptocurrency Investment Stipulated Sum

2025.02.10김국일

The Seocho law firm's client had invested in a cryptocurrency program but did not receive the agreed returns, and sought a law firm with expertise in financial litigation near Seocho to resolve the matter through legal assistance.

1. Background of the Case Handled by the Seocho Law Firm

The client explained that he had invested in a cryptocurrency-related financial program and even drew up a written undertaking to perform, but did not receive his returns.

The client then decided to resolve the matter through trial and visited the Seocho office, seeking an attorney with extensive experience in financial litigation.

The Client's Situation

The client is the representative of a company operating in the AI and big data field.

Two years earlier, while running the business, he was introduced to A, a developer of investment programs, and collaborated on several ventures. In the course of this, A proposed that he invest in a cryptocurrency program that A had developed.

After reviewing the program, the client invested a large sum amounting to about 2 billion won and, at the time of the investment agreement, even drew up a written undertaking to perform regarding the returns.

The client received the returns on the promised dates early in the investment, but from three months later, he received no returns at all, with A citing reasons such as fluctuations in the coin price.

The client requested payment several times, but A only made excuses and kept putting it off, saying things like, "Cash flow is tight, so I will send it a little later."

The client then resolved to resolve the matter legally through a lawsuit and, while searching for an attorney with expertise in related cases, came to the Seocho law firm.

2. Case-Related Information Explained by the Seocho Law Firm

According to Supreme Court precedent, if a document bearing the character of a contract, such as a written undertaking to perform an investment agreement, has been drawn up and there is no clear legal ground to rebut it, its contents must be followed as written.

In the client's case, the written undertaking to perform that was drawn up at the time of the investment agreement specified the investment amount, the returns, the fees, and the like, and even clearly stated the payment dates.

When pursuing a claim for a stipulated sum to recover an investment in this way, you should note that the judgment may differ depending on whether there are documents in which the details of the investment are recorded in detail.

Below is part of the relevant Supreme Court precedent.

"As long as the authenticity of a dispositive document is recognized, a court must, absent clear and persuasive counter-evidence sufficient to deny the contents recorded therein, acknowledge its contents..."
(see Supreme Court Decision 2008Da47367)

In particular, investments related to financial products that have been rising recently, such as cryptocurrency and coins, are highly volatile and difficult to predict, so documents specifying the terms of the agreement, such as an investment confirmation or a written undertaking to perform, are indispensable.

If you become involved in a 🔗financial dispute related to financial product investment in this way, you need to have knowledge of the relevant precedents and points at issue and prepare an appropriate response, so seeking advice from an attorney can be helpful.

3. Assistance Provided by the Seocho Law Firm

The Seocho law firm closely examined the circumstances at the time of the investment, the relevant documents, and the written undertaking to perform, analyzed the legal points at issue, and conducted the defense.

Seocho Law Firm's Defense ① The Defendant's Agreed Terms

According to the written undertaking to perform that the client and the defendant, A, drew up together and even had notarized, the client's investment amount, returns, and fees were all clearly stated.

The Seocho law firm emphasized that the defendant had an obligation to comply with the written undertaking to perform.

Seocho Law Firm's Defense ② No Grounds for Nonpayment of Returns

When entering into the investment contract, the defendant agreed to nothing regarding grounds for nonpayment.

The Seocho law firm emphasized that no grounds whatsoever were recognized for the defendant's nonpayment of the returns, fees, and the like.

Case of investment return lawsuit as seen in cartoons
View more

‘Virtual currency investment principal lawsuit’ court finds ‘not guilty’
Read related articles

4. Result of the Seocho Law Firm's Assistance to the Client

The court, accepting the Seocho law firm's arguments, issued a judgment ordering the defendant to pay the full amount claimed by the client.

This was a case in which the client, who had filed a lawsuit related to a financial product investment, was assisted and had the entire amount claimed recognized, winning the case in full.

At Daeryun Law Firm, financial attorneys with a deep understanding of legal disputes related to asset management provide assistance based on their professional knowledge.

If you are troubled by a similar matter, we invite you to seek help through an 🔗attorney recommendation.

This content is based on actual cases handled by Daeryun Law LLC and has been partially adapted. All copyrights belong to Daeryun Law LLC.
Unauthorized reproduction, copying or distribution may result in legal action under applicable laws.