A warrant was sought for your client's arrest on charges that he profited from recruiting members to an unauthorized private home trading system (HTS). ■ Case Issues The client admitted to some of the allegations, but denied that he was a member recruiter for some periods of time and acted as a direct investor, which the police suspected and sought an arrest warrant for. Ongang's lawyers collected evidence to prove that the client was not trying to minimize the crime, hiding evidence, or not cooperating with the investigation. In addition, Ongang's lawyers argued that the client's residence was consistent, he provided his cell phone password, and he was supporting his minor child alone. As a result, the client was able to undergo the investigation without being detained.

The client received a certain amount of money from a man in an intimate relationship in the name of old age expenses, tax savings, and living expenses, and later paid alimony to his wife due to an adultery lawsuit, and the man sued the client for extortion, claiming that he was forced to give the money because the client threatened to inform his wife of the adultery. The client was forced to confess to the crime due to police coercion during the police investigation due to his fragile personality, and subsequently visited Ongang Law Firm. Ongang Law Firm's defense team responded by submitting an opinion letter to the prosecutor, emphasizing that the client was forced to make statements different from the facts due to police coercion. The defense team of Ong Kang Law Firm submitted an amicus curiae brief to the prosecution, emphasizing that the money was a gift in light of the relationship with the complainant and the circumstances that led to the payment.