Case overview
You are a self-employed business owner who has operated a cell phone store and has been doing a good job. You are being investigated by law enforcement for allegedly aiding and abetting a so-called "cell phone gang" criminal organization.
Specifically, the investigative agency determined that the client helped open the phone even though he knew that it was for a cell phone bank and not for actual use. The client came to Ongang Law Firm deeply reflecting on the improper opening of the phone in the process of handling the opening.
Case issues
The key issue in the case was whether the client was intentionally aiding and abetting, especially given that only 0.4% of the total number of openings were in question, that the client had in place controls in place to prevent illegal openings, including a deposit system, and that the client had never been criminally charged in its decades of business.
Assistance from the warm river
Ongang's defense team developed and executed a multi-faceted and sophisticated defense strategy to successfully resolve this case. First, we conducted a detailed analysis of our client's business practices, focusing on proving that the true purpose of the deposit system was to prevent incentive recoupment and prevent illegal opening.
Noting that his client averages more than 100 openings per month, Ongang also presented a statistical analysis showing that the problematic cases represented only 0.4% of all openings, convincingly arguing that the cases were likely to be simple mistakes due to workload rather than intentional negligence.
Most notably, Wengang analyzed a vast amount of data, including tax records, transaction records, and employee management records from the client's decades of business, to prove the client's integrity and sound management, which objectively demonstrated that the client had earned a stable income from honest business, not illegal profits.
Based on this comprehensive analysis and evidence, Ongkang submitted a detailed brief to the prosecution, and was able to gain the prosecution's trust by providing clarification of some ambiguities in the client's statement. Through analysis of similar cases, Ongkang was able to convincingly argue that summary judgment was appropriate in this case, ultimately leading to a favorable outcome for the client.
Results
The prosecutor accepted Onkang Law Firm's opinion and requested a summary judgment instead of a full trial, and a fine of 7 million won was ultimately imposed. This was a very low penalty compared to similar cases, and was the result of Onkang's argument that the client's intent was low.
