■ Case Overview The defendant was entrusted by the client to manage the account, including the payment of capital gains taxes, and misappropriated the entrusted funds. The defendant withdrew tens of millions of won from the complainant's account in the name of paying capital gains taxes, but the actual amount of taxes paid was much less than that, and the defendant used the remaining amount for personal use. The client approached Ongang Law Firm. ■ Case Issues The key issues in this case were twofold: first, the scope and limits of the delegation of account management, and second, whether the defendants' actions constituted embezzlement. In particular, the existence of the defendants' alleged "implied authorization to use" and the actual use of the funds related to capital gains taxes became important issues. Onkang's defense team took a multifaceted approach to successfully resolve this case. First, we closely analyzed the bank's account transaction details to determine whether the

* This case is a plaintiff representation success story. ■ Case Summary The client was looking for a work-from-home job and was introduced to an online purchase agency. The perpetrators set up a fake shopping mall site and deceived the client into making money through the purchase agency, defrauding the client out of tens of millions of won. In particular, the perpetrators systematically divided roles to operate the fake site, manage the account, and deceive the victim, and used sophisticated methods to induce additional remittances under the guise of income tax refunds. ■ Case Issues The main issues in this case were 1) the organization and planning of the crime, 2) the amount of the loss, and 3) the possibility of recovering the loss. In particular, the perpetrators used sophisticated fraudulent schemes to obtain large sums of money in a short period of time, and the systematic involvement of multiple accomplices. From the outset of the case, Onkang's defense counsel worked with digital forensics experts to identify the fraudulent site

The client lent the defendant about 100 million won (check) in the name of stock investment around June 2012, but the defendant used it for personal use and lied to the client for about 10 years and did not repay a single penny. The client no longer wanted to be fooled by the defendant's lies and sought punishment from the defendant by filing a fraud complaint. ■ Case Issues The case occurred in June 2012, and given that the statute of limitations for fraud is 10 years, when the client came to us in May 2022, there was only one month left before the statute of limitations expired. We recognized that it was a difficult case for both us and the client, and we decided to settle for doing our best with the time we had left. Our lawyers quickly understood the case and requested the client to provide supporting evidence (cashbooks, copies of checks, etc.), and submitted the complaint and supplemental complaint to the investigative agency.