Voice Phishing Victim Relief | Assisting a Voice Phishing Victim with a Claim for Damages, Recovering 30 Million Won

The specialist attorney conducted a consultation to resolve the client's case and set about understanding the details.

The client said that one day, while working as an office worker, he received a phone call.

The caller said that he was an investigator with the Seoul District Prosecutors' Office and stated that the client's bank account, which had been opened through identity theft, had been used illegally and that a detention warrant had been issued.

The client, in a flustered state, asked how he should respond, and the other party said that he needed to prove that his identity had been stolen and that proof of transparent assets regarding his savings and deposits was required.

As for the method of proving transparent assets, the caller said that the client should hand cash to an employee of the Financial Supervisory Service, and the client met the Financial Supervisory Service employee and handed over about 40 million won in cash.

However, this Financial Supervisory Service employee was merely a cash collector for a voice phishing organization, and the client lost the entire large sum and proceeded with a criminal complaint.

The cash collector was said to have been sentenced to imprisonment and to be serving the sentence, and the client requested assistance with voice phishing harm relief, saying that he wished to recover the amount he had lost.

If you have suffered 🔗voice phishing harm, you should follow the following procedures right away.

1. Call the receiving financial company, etc., to report the harm and request suspension of payment on the account

2. Reset the mobile phone or delete the malicious application

3. Register the fact of personal information exposure with the Financial Supervisory Service's personal information exposure incident prevention system

4. Check whether a mobile phone has been opened under your stolen identity through the Korea Association for ICT Promotion's identity theft prevention service

In addition to filing for relief, a voice phishing victim may make a claim for damages against the offender.

This is making a claim for damages on the basis of a tort where one has suffered loss due to an unlawful act caused by the offender's intent or negligence, and the procedure is as follows.

The voice phishing specialist attorney, after a long consultation with the client, fully grasped the details of the case and prepared and filed a complaint.

The purport of the claim in the complaint prepared by the specialized attorney was as follows.

The voice phishing specialized attorney argued that the perpetrator bore liability for damages because he had committed a tort.

The perpetrator had agreed to take on the role of a voice phishing cash collector, gathering and delivering cash from victims including the client.

The perpetrator deceived the client by posing as an employee of the Financial Supervisory Service, and thereby received and took 40 million won in cash.

The perpetrator was also sentenced to a term of imprisonment for this tort and is serving it.

The voice phishing attorney argued that the perpetrator showed no sign of remorse at all regarding the offense in this case.

The client realized that she had been the victim of voice phishing and immediately reported it to the police.

During the trial, the perpetrator requested access to the client's contact information for the purpose of reaching a settlement with the client, but thereafter made no apology or settlement request whatsoever.

Accordingly, the attorney argued that the perpetrator was not showing a genuinely remorseful attitude.

The voice phishing attorney argued that the degree of harm to the client from this case was serious.

The client had all of the assets accumulated over about 5 years taken, suffering not only financial harm but also psychological harm, and is reporting difficulties in daily life.

The client is suffering from severe depression, undergoing both psychiatric counseling and medication treatment.

The attorney, citing such circumstances, argued that because it is clear that the perpetrator committed a tort, the perpetrator has a responsibility to compensate the client for the loss.