The client lent the defendant, whom he met at a club, more than $10 million and never received a penny back. The client sued the defendant for fraud. ■ Case Issues The client filed the complaint on her own without legal assistance, but the defendant's father was delaying the payment of child support, saying that he would pay in installments, which put the client under extreme stress. Our lawyers made it clear that it was impossible to pay in installments as claimed by the defendant, and pressed for quick compensation. In less than a week, the client received 15 million won back, and the case was dropped through a settlement.

The client's job was an ordering representative. The client and the victim were partners in a company and did business with the victim's company. The client ordered more than the victim needed and misappropriated a portion of the money wired to the victim in various ways. The client was tried for fraud. ■ Case Issues The client caused the company to over-order the products it needed, and then had the company's financial officer transfer the amount of the over-order to the manufacturing company, resulting in damages to the victim company amounting to 100 million units. Therefore, it was important for the client to compensate for the damages and avoid imprisonment through a plea bargain, as severe punishment was inevitable even if the amount was compensated. The defense lawyers at Ongang Law Firm argued that the amount of damages compensated by the defendant was reasonable, even though it fell short of the total amount of damages; that the defendant committed the crime due to his difficult livelihood and the degree of blame was relatively weak; that many people

The client and the complainant were co-presidents of a company, and the client was accused by the complainant of breaching his professional duty to run the company legally together. The client gradually cut off contact with the complainant, established a new company separately, and allowed the complainant to gain financial benefits. Issues in the case A. The requirements for the offense of professional dishonesty B. Whether the client's conduct constituted professional dishonesty C. The client's motive for filing the false accusation. Motivation of the accuser to file a false accusation ■ Issue Resolution In this case, our lawyers first carefully reviewed the relationship between the accuser and our client, and then submitted the fact that a criminal case was underway due to the accuser's misconduct as evidence, while also reviewing the legal facts that our client's actions did not constitute professional misconduct and actively arguing that the facts were different from the accuser's allegations. With the assistance of our lawyers, the case was dismissed and our client was able to return to his daily life.

The client stole luxury clothes, bags, and other items worth more than tens of millions of won from the defendant, who worked as a domestic helper in her home for many years. The client sued the domestic helper for theft. ■ Case Issues 1) During the prosecution, the defendant admitted only to the theft of luxury clothing and other items for which there was objective evidence such as CCTV footage, and 2) The defendant denied that there was no objective evidence regarding expensive luxury bags such as Chanel, Prada, Hermes, Gucci, etc. 3) Our firm appeared at the evidentiary hearing to provide specific opinions and to file a severe plea against the defendant. The defense team of Ongang Law Firm attended the evidence examination date and expressed their opinions by specifically identifying items of similar size and material in the CCTV footage of the defendant's residence, etc.

The client, along with his accomplices, received home appliances from the victim company in the name of free gifts. The client bought them and sold them as second-hand goods, defrauding the company of more than hundreds of millions of won. The client came to Ongang Law Firm after the investigative agency requested an arrest warrant based on the facts of the alleged violation of the Act on Aggravated Punishment of Certain Economic Crimes (fraud). ■ Case Issues The investigative agency requested an arrest warrant for our client on the grounds that the crime was serious, there was a high likelihood of future recidivism, and there was a possibility of destruction of evidence in light of the long period of time that our client had committed the crime, the sophistication of the crime, and the actions taken by the suspect to avoid detection during the crime. The investigating agency suspected that the client had committed many other crimes in addition to this one, based on the client's account transaction history. In the second application for the warrant, the investigating agency further proved the conspiracy and organization among the accomplices to detain the client,

While working as a brokerage assistant for a company, the client arbitrarily spent about 100 million won on dozens of occasions without passing on the rent received from a tenant to the victim. The client was sued by the company for business embezzlement. Case Issues 1) First, in the case of business embezzlement, settlement with the victim was a priority. However, in this case, the victim made it clear to the client that the settlement could not proceed unless the client agreed to pay the full amount. 2) In this regard, it was expected that the defendant would face difficulties in admitting the facts of the prosecution as well as in proceeding with the settlement. 3) In addition, it was necessary to carefully review and organize the client's plea materials. Resolution of Issues Ongang Law Firm's defense team made every effort to reach a settlement with the victim. Although it was not possible to reimburse (i.e., recover damages) for the full amount stated in the indictment at this point in time.

During the process of smuggling the women into the U.S., the ex-husband demanded that the women be picked up at the airport and taken to a specific location if they wanted a collaborative divorce, without explaining the circumstances. The client was afraid that she would not be able to get a collaborative divorce, so she complied with the ex-husband's instructions. The incident caused the client in the U.S. extreme distress and resulted in charges of forgery of a public document, forgery of a public document, forgery of a private document, and forgery of a private document. The ex-husband had already been sentenced to a criminal judgment for the incident. He had falsely stated that he had been instructed by the client in connection with the incident, and the client's name was listed on the judgment. The client's name was also listed on the judgment. The client was in the U.S. and had no knowledge of the incident because she was living in the U.S. The client had no knowledge of the incident.

Company A was entrusted with the marketing and sale of 100 commercial buildings worth tens of billions of won. However, due to poor sales, the company was asked to recover the loan, and eventually decided to sell them all at a discount of about 60% from the initial sales price. Upon learning of this, CEO B conspired with real estate agents and loan brokers to extort loans from financial institutions by creating false sales contracts that inflated the sales price. The client, who was in charge of practical work as a deputy director of Company B, drew up a false sales contract under the direction of Representative B. The conspirators, including real estate agents and loan brokers, used it to apply for mortgages from banks and other financial institutions, and received a total of 10 billion won in remittances from the deceived victims. In addition, Company B decided to sell the shopping mall purchased for 10 billion won to D for 10 billion won, but drew up a false sales contract as if it was sold for 300 billion won and submitted it to the bank.

The client is a friend of the accomplice, who invested in Victim A's business and did not receive his investment back. The accomplice decided to take and dispose of Victim A's property to recover his investment, and went to the victim's office with the client. The client and his accomplice beat victims B and C, who were guarding the office, with weapons, found victim A, forced him to sign a disposition document after the assault, and detained him to prevent him from escaping. The client was later arrested by the police, who responded to a report from another person, and was investigated and tried on charges of robbery, special injury, violation of the Violent Crimes Act (joint injury), and violation of the Violent Crimes Act (joint detention). ■ Case Issues The client committed the crimes accidentally at the request of an accomplice, but faced serious charges for wielding a weapon, causing multiple victims, and detaining the victims to prevent them from reporting. Because this was a violent crime with a statutory minimum sentence of 7 years in prison and a maximum of 10 years in prison, a plea bargain could have resulted in a maximum of

You are an employee of a food company, and together with an accomplice, who is also a coworker, you took food products destined for disposal without authorization from the company. Several months later, you and your coworkers were discovered by the company and were investigated by the police for grand theft. ■ Case Issues The client acknowledged his wrongdoing and was deeply remorseful for taking the food products belonging to the victim company without permission. However, the client had to explain that he was told by his team leader that the food products were to be disposed of, and that he took them home because he did not want to waste them and did not intentionally steal them. In addition, the client and his accomplices did not conspire to commit the crime, so it was important to change the crime from grand theft to simple theft. The client's defense lawyers compared the number of days the client committed the crime with the actual number of crimes, and concluded that the days when the client did not commit the crime should be excluded, and that the client only accidentally committed the crime with his accomplices.