While working as a contract employee at a company, the client was molested several times on the same day by her immediate supervisor, who had also interviewed her, including molestation at a karaoke bar, molestation in a car, and molestation in front of her house. The client sued her supervisor for molestation based on professional authority. ■ Case Issues 1) The client, who had just graduated from college and was a contract worker, blamed herself for not immediately protesting or filing a report when she was first groped at a karaoke bar. 2) The client was unable to explicitly refuse the perpetrator's offer to take her home in a taxi, and was subjected to intense groping, including kissing her on the lips and hugging her while they were in the taxi. 3) The client was worried that the groping would not be recognized because she laughed until the end, so she was unable to provide a detailed explanation of the incident and explicitly refuse the offer.

The defendant picked up the client and a group of people and then drove everyone else home except the client. While driving the client last, he saw that the client was drunk and falling asleep in the second row and decided to commit adultery. After stopping the car he was driving in the parking lot of a nearby villa while searching for a place to commit the crime with the client in the car, the defendant took advantage of the fact that the client was asleep and unable to resist to remove her bottom and insert his penis into the victim's vagina, thereby committing quasi-rape. The client sued the defendant for quasi-rape, as she suffered from an unforgettable and horrific experience. ■ Case Issues In this case, the issue was whether the victim was unconscious or incapacitated at the time of the incident. The accused alleged that he was driving the client and engaged in a lewd conversation with her as they drove away. The client also alleged that she suddenly grabbed his hand and pulled him away.

Beginning in 2017, the client dated her ex-boyfriend, the defendant, for approximately two years and continued to see him for a period of time before they resumed dating in 2021, during which they agreed to have no sexual contact. During the course of their relationship, the accused assaulted, injured, or damaged the client's property during an argument, and molested the client in violation of their agreement not to have sexual contact during the cooling-off period. The client sued the accused for rape and other charges. Case Issues This case involved a romantic relationship, and it was necessary to understand the unfamiliar concept of the cooling-off period to prove whether the defendant committed a crime against the client. ■ Issue Resolution Ongang's defense team rehearsed the victim's testimony in advance by preparing anticipated questions for the victim's testimony, and helped the defense team fully explain the circumstances that needed to be emphasized to the trial court. After the testimony, we summarized all the questions that the trial court and the defense had at the time of the testimony and submitted them to the victim's counsel as a memorandum.

With the assistance of Ongang Law Firm's defense team, Mr. A was sentenced to 6 months in prison and 2 years of probation, which was later confirmed. However, Mr. A was forced to undergo continuous psychiatric treatment as a result of the above molestation incident, and was forced to take a leave of absence from the police force due to feelings of anxiety and self-blame. In addition, the client's husband, who was also a police officer working in the same area, was also subjected to mental stress as the client's case was rumored within the police force. Therefore, the client filed a lawsuit against Mr. A for damages. ■ Case Issues The criminal judgment against A was already finalized and the illegal act was admitted, but A claimed that the damages claimed were excessive and could not compensate for all the damages caused by alimony and leave of absence. In response, the client argued that the client's leave of absence was caused by A's illegal act and that the client's damages, including lost earnings, were substantial.

The offender (appellant) was the client's pastor. The respondent was about 30 years older than the client, and over a period of five years, from when the client was a minor to when the client was an adult, the respondent engaged in dozens of unwanted sexual acts against the client, using force and sexual violence against the client. The client was so traumatized by the respondent's behavior that she attempted suicide on several occasions, and suffered physical harm that was difficult to recover from, resulting in extreme anxiety that prevented her from functioning in her daily life. The original prosecutor made a mechanical error of judgment by partially prosecuting and partially not prosecuting the same pattern of grooming sexual offenses over a number of years without clear criteria. The original prosecutor used the case hearing to clarify the nature of the hierarchy exercised by the respondent and the point at which it distorted the client's sexual decision-making, as well as the client's motivation for committing adultery.

You are a graduate student working on your master's degree, and the suspect is a friend of your ex-boyfriend. During the approximately four-year period of her relationship with her ex-boyfriend, the client met the suspect four or five times at drinking parties, and on the day of the incident, the client became intoxicated during her first drink alone with the suspect. The suspect proceeded to commit the act of forcible rape against the client's will, recognizing and tolerating the fact that the client was intoxicated and incapacitated, and that the client was in a state of unconsciousness or incapacitation. However, the client was unable to distinguish whether her memories were dreams or reality immediately after the suspect's forcible rape, and later suffered from a severe hangover and post-inebriation amnesia (blackout) in which her memories of the incident were only intermittent and fragmented. ■ Case Issues In the end, given the client's inability to recall what happened, the main issues in this case were whether the complainant was in a state of mind or incapacitated, whether the accused was

The client was a member of the respondent's church and the respondent was the client's pastor. The respondent was a middle-aged man in his 50s, about 30 years older than the client, who used force and sexual violence against the client by attempting to engage in unwanted sexual acts against her on dozens of occasions over a five-year period, from when she was a minor to when she was an adult. The client was so traumatized by the respondent's behavior that she attempted suicide several times, and suffered physical injuries that were difficult to repair, leaving her with extreme anxiety that prevented her from functioning in her daily life. ■ Case Issues The original prosecutor made a mechanical error of judgment by partially prosecuting and partially not prosecuting the same pattern of grooming sexual offenses over a number of years without clear criteria, and the original prosecutor used the case hearing to clarify the nature of the hierarchy exercised by the respondent and the extent to which it distorted the appellant's sexual decisions,

The clients suffered for a long time because they were continuously groped and sexually harassed by the president of the company where they worked, but were unable to file a complaint due to the attitude of the president and his wife, who did not take it seriously, and their livelihood. Eventually, however, as the employees they worked with left the company one by one due to such harassment, and as their mental suffering became extremely severe as they were worried that they would be harassed again throughout their working lives, they decided to leave the company and filed a lawsuit against the defendants for violating the Special Act on the Punishment of Sexual Offenses (harassment due to work authority). ■ Case Issues The accused consistently denied the allegations throughout the investigation, stating that the physical contact was "a sign of friendliness," and even went so far as to sue for breach of privacy when the clients obtained CCTV for evidence of the groping, causing the clients to go through another distressing time before the case was dismissed. The accused's wife appeared as a witness during the trial and testified that the accused had made physical contact with her in a way that he normally treats his employees in a friendly manner.

The client was a casual passenger on the subway with the suspect and had never met him before. During the course of the subway ride, the client became involved in an argument with the suspect, during which the suspect inflicted a shoulder joint contusion on the client that required three weeks of medical treatment. The suspect also used his hands and cell phone to make multiple stabbing motions to the client's upper body, including his chest and abdomen. The client, who was studying to obtain a national board certification, was so upset and frustrated after the incident that she developed panic disorder and had breathing difficulties that prevented her from concentrating on her studies at the most critical time. The client had to go back and forth between orthopedic and psychiatric clinics, even though it was not enough to focus solely on preparing for the exam. He decided to sue us for rape and injury and came to us. ■ Case Issues The client and the accused did not have a relationship, and the case was filed against the accused.