Corporate Investigations & White Collar Defense
[Anti-Corruption and Financial Economic Crimes] Barun Law Successfully Dismissed an Arrest Warrant for the Chairman of a Construction Company Accused of Defrauding Financial Institutions of KRW 14.8 B in Construction Payments and Embezzling KRW 1.3 B of Company Funds
1. Case Overview The client was investigated by the Seoul Central District Prosecutors' Office, Anti-Corruption Division 1, on allegations of loan fraud. In or around 2023, despite intending to carry out construction work at a low cost through Company A without its own funding, the client allegedly submitted a false construction contract that inflated the project cost to KRW 26 billion, naming an affiliate, Company B, as the contractor. The client was further accused of submitting accounting records that included fictitious sales and a business plan with no feasibility, thereby deceiving Korea Credit Guarantee Fund and commercial banks into approving loans totaling KRW 20.8 billion and subsequently misappropriating the funds. From February to May 2025, the prosecution additionally conducted a parallel investigation, treating certain salary payments made by the borrower company and its affiliates to their employees as occupational embezzlement. During this time, two additional search and seizures were conducted, and the prosecution summoned the suspect and related persons for investigation a total of 25 times. Following the search and seizure, the client sought assistance from Barun Law, known for its outstanding performance in anti-corruption and financial economic crime cases. 2. Our Arguments and Role This case involved an intense, high-pressure investigation conducted by the Seoul Central District Prosecutors' Office, Anti-Corruption Division 1, after a long-term secret investigation. The client was under considerable stress as a result. We closely examined the facts and submitted multiple opinion letters asserting that the client was not guilty of any of the alleged crimes, and conducted in-person advocacy before the investigative authorities. In the warrant hearing, we submitted an opinion brief exceeding 200 pages and actively argued that the charges were unsubstantiated in their entirety. With respect to the loan fraud allegations, we argued that: (1) Internal recordings and documents confirmed the client’s intent to carry out direct construction through the affiliate Company B; (2) After loan approval, the contractor was changed to Company A through a fair bidding process in order to reduce construction costs by separating out the basic construction; (3) The process of adjusting the project cost and all supporting documentation were transparently disclosed to Korea Credit Guarantee Fund and the commercial banks; (4) The client faithfully bore the required portion of the construction cost, and the project proceeded normally; (5) The client not only provided collateral in the form of affiliate shares and personally-owned real estate, but also ensured that the affiliate committed to covering loan interest and construction costs, thereby demonstrating sufficient repayment capacity; and (6) Ultimately, the loan was converted into a mortgage loan post-completion, causing no damage to the financial institutions—in fact, the loans were extended. Based on these facts, we argued that the client neither had the intent to defraud nor committed any deceptive acts, and therefore, the fraud charges could not be substantiated. With respect to the occupational embezzlement allegations, we argued that salary payments to the client's child, who was a registered director, could not establish the requisite intent for embezzlement and were lawful under relevant regulations. In addition, we emphasized that the cash salaries paid to certain employees were all redeposited into the corporate account, making it difficult to infer any intent to misappropriate funds. Furthermore, even the amounts under suspicion by the prosecution were returned to the company, meaning that there was no harm and therefore no justification for criminal punishment. 3. Outcome and Significance In this case, we maintained close communication with the client, quickly identified the issues suspected by the prosecution, and proactively anticipated the investigation’s direction. As a result, none of the clients were detained. This case exemplifies how our strategic, tailored response to anti-corruption investigations and our exceptional ability to persuade the warrant court allowed clients who might otherwise have faced unjust pre-trial detention to undergo the investigation and trial process without being taken into custody.
2025. 06. 27
Anti-Corruption and Financial Economic Crimes
[Anti-Corruption and Financial Economic Crimes] Barun Law Secured a Disposition of Non-Prosecution (with Suspension of Indictment) for a Commercial Bank Employee Who Could Have Been Indicted and Detained for Breach of Trust Under the Act on the Aggravated Punishment of Specific Economic Crimes
1. Case Overview In 2023, the client, who was serving as a branch manager at a commercial bank, processed a total of approximately KRW 7.5 billion in loans to companies with poor financial standing under the instructions of the bank's top executives, their close relatives, and the client's direct superior. The Financial Supervisory Service reported to the prosecution that the bank's top management, including the client, had unjustly extended loans to financially unsound companies. The prosecution subsequently launched a full-scale investigation, booking the client and other individuals involved on charges of breach of trust under the Act on the Aggravated Punishment of Specific Economic Crimes. 2. Key Issues Shortly after commencing the investigation, the prosecution arrested the bank's top executives and their relatives, who were central figures in the case. The client was also identified as a key individual, and a search and seizure was conducted, with expectations that an arrest warrant and indictment against the client would soon follow. The client turned to Barun Law, recognized for its exceptional capabilities in responding to anti-corruption and financial economic crime investigations, seeking to (1) avoid pre-trial detention, and (2) obtain the most lenient possible disposition. 3. Our Arguments and Role After being retained, we thoroughly reviewed the facts and analyzed the overall structure of the case. We concluded that the best course of action was to fully cooperate with the investigation and appeal for leniency. We argued to the prosecution that the client had no choice but to follow upper-level instructions when processing the loans and that the client intended to actively cooperate in clarifying the facts of the case. We assisted the client in truthfully testifying about the background and process of the loan issuance and the roles of related parties during the investigation. We also prepared and submitted detailed written statements in response to the prosecution's requests for explanation. As a result, the prosecution determined that pre-trial detention was unnecessary in the client's case and, unlike the other individuals involved, did not seek an arrest warrant. Furthermore, the prosecution accepted our argument that the client acted under unavoidable instructions from superiors and actively cooperated in the investigation. The client was ultimately granted a highly unusual disposition of non-prosecution with suspension of indictment. 4. Outcome and Significance By consulting with Barun Law at an early stage and placing trust in the firm's guidance, the client was able to fully cooperate with the investigation and disclose the truth. As a result, the client not only avoided detention but also avoided prosecution altogether, receiving a favorable disposition of suspended indictment.
2025. 06. 27
Corporate Investigations & White Collar Defense
[Corporate Criminal Defense] Barun Law Successfully Defended Clients Accused of Fraud and Breach of Trust Involving Over KRW 7 B and KRW 2 B, Respectively, Resulting in All Charges Being Dropped
1. Case Overview and Issues In July 2021, the clients sold 60% of the shares of their family-run design company to the complainant for KRW 7 billion. The complainant subsequently filed a criminal complaint, alleging: (1) Fraud in the amount of KRW 7 billion, claiming that the clients had also sold the company's trademark rights, and (2) Occupational breach of trust involving KRW 2 billion, claiming that the clients misappropriated the company's payment for goods. During the police investigation, when the lead investigator indicated that the seriousness of the case could lead to detention, the clients recognized the gravity of the matter and promptly retained Barun Law, known for its expertise in corporate criminal defense. 2. Our Arguments and Role We thoroughly investigated the facts and filed a counter-complaint against the original complainant for false accusation (in relation to the fraud allegation), forgery and use of the forged private documents, and violation of the Act on Promotion of Information and Communications Network Utilization. In the police investigation stage, we argued the following points to rebut the fraud allegation: (1) The complainant was a seasoned design firm with extensive experience in acquiring trademarks; (2) When purchasing shares of a similar design company prior to this deal, the complainant had expressly included the acquisition of trademarks in the contract; (3) The clients' trademark alone was worth KRW 7.3 billion, which is equivalent to the entire purchase price; (4) The complainant was informed immediately after the transaction that the trademark remained in the clients' ownership, yet raised no objection for an entire year; (5) Trademark ownership is publicly disclosed and, even if overlooked, is deemed to be known; and (6) Court precedents establish that failing to disclose trademark ownership does not constitute fraudulent misrepresentation. As a result, the fraud allegation was dismissed with a decision of non-prosecution. With respect to the breach of trust charge, although it was true that the client had used KRW 2 billion of company funds for personal purposes, the case was initially referred to the prosecution with a recommendation for indictment. At the prosecution stage, we made the following arguments: (1) The complainant had filed the complaint without understanding the business circumstances during the client's management; (2) The KRW 2 billion was compensation for the transfer of two brands that the client had launched as a sole proprietor, which generated tens of billions of won in profits for the company; (3) A valuation by an accounting firm assessed the transferred business's value at KRW 3.3 billion at the time of transfer; (4) A shareholder resolution had been duly passed at the time of the transfer; and (5) After the incident, the client filed a civil lawsuit seeking the unpaid KRW 1.38 billion in consideration for the transfer. We submitted the accounting firm's objective valuation as evidence, and notarized the shareholder resolution to strengthen the defense. Furthermore, we discovered that the complainant had deceived the clients by withholding KRW 2 billion of the purchase price, and filed an additional criminal complaint against the complainant for fraud under the Act on the Aggravated Punishment of Specific Economic Crimes. The clients and their family suffered greatly during the investigation, as all four members were placed under an overseas travel ban, seriously disrupting their business operations and plans for immigration. We also worked diligently to secure temporary lifting of the travel ban to facilitate the clients' travel needs. 3. Outcome and Significance Although the case was delayed due to a large volume of records and the replacement of three lead prosecutors during the referral phase, our consistent submission of concise argument briefs and repeated in-person advocacy ultimately persuaded the prosecution. Thanks to retaining Barun Law, which possesses deep expertise in corporate criminal matters, the clients avoided the risk of unjust detention or prosecution. Moreover, one client who had been preparing for immigration to the United States was able to avoid criminal charges that could have derailed the immigration process.
2025. 06. 27
Automobiles
[Criminal Defense] Barun Law Secured Full Acquittals at Both the Trial and Appellate Levels for a Client Charged with Hit-and-Run Causing Injury and Failure to Take Post-Accident Measures, on the Grounds that There was no Causal Relationship Between the Client's Sudden Lane Change and the Subsequent Rear-End Collision
1. Case Overview a. Party represented by Barun Law: The driver of vehicle A, who changed lanes suddenly from the first lane of a three-lane, one-way road (six lanes total, three in each direction) to the safety zone between the second and third lanes. b. Background of the Case: (1) The client was driving in the first lane and suddenly changed lanes toward the safety zone between the second and third lanes in order to exit via an interchange (hereinafter referred to as the "sudden lane change"). (2) At that moment, vehicle B, which had been driving in the third lane behind the client’s vehicle, had just moved into the second lane. As a result of the client's sudden lane change, vehicle B made an abrupt stop in the second lane. However, there was no collision between vehicles A and B. (3) Meanwhile, vehicle C, a kindergarten bus carrying multiple children, was driving behind vehicle B in the second lane. Upon observing vehicle B's abrupt stop, the driver of vehicle C attempted to brake but ended up rear-ending vehicle B (hereinafter referred to as the "rear-end collision"). (4) The client was unaware of the rear-end collision and exited onto the ramp via the third lane. The client was subsequently charged with hit-and-run causing injury under the Act on the Aggravated Punishment of Specific Crimes and failure to take post-accident measures under the Road Traffic Act. c. Litigation: ① Judgement: Full acquittals ② Grounds for the Judgement: Both the first-instance and appellate courts found that there was no causal relationship between the client's sudden lane change and the rear-end collision. The courts ruled the defendant not guilty based on the following key findings: (1) Under Article 19(1) of the Road Traffic Act, all drivers must maintain a sufficient distance to avoid collisions in case the vehicle in front stops suddenly. Vehicle C appeared not to have maintained such a distance, despite observing vehicle B change lanes. (2) The driver of vehicle C seemingly failed to fully engage the brakes. The driver later testified that they could not brake forcefully because children were on board. (3) Vehicle B changed lanes from the third to the second lane at a location marked with a solid line, where lane changes were prohibited. Thus, vehicle B’s movement could not be considered "normal traffic behavior." 2. Our Arguments and Role We carefully analyzed all relevant materials, including dashcam footage, and focused our defense strategy on disproving the causal link between the client's sudden lane change and the rear-end collision. Notably, we cited the "protective purpose of the norm" theory—a legal doctrine often found only in textbooks and rarely invoked in practice—to persuade the court. Both the trial and appellate courts ultimately accepted our argument and rendered not guilty decisions on the basis that no causal relationship existed. 3. Significance of the Judgment It is exceedingly rare for defendants in so-called "non-contact hit-and-run" cases to be acquitted on the grounds of lack of causation. We successfully demonstrated the factual circumstances surrounding the client’s driving and the behavior of the following vehicles. By incorporating both academic theories and relevant precedents into its legal arguments, we persuaded the court to issue acquittals. This case thus serves as a meaningful precedent regarding causation in non-contact hit-and-run cases.
2025. 06. 27
General Criminal Litigation and Investigation Response
[Criminal Complaint & Investigation Response] Barun Law Secured a Disposition of Suspension of Indictment with a Mandatory Education Completion Condition for a Client Accused of Quasi-Rape
1. Case Overview In October 2024, the client, a first-year university student, was drinking late at night with a fellow student and club member whom he encountered by chance at a bar. Around 4:00 a.m., while sitting together on a bench near the dormitory, the client allegedly forced a kiss and engaged in non-consensual sexual activity, resulting in a criminal complaint for quasi-rape. 2. Key Issues and Challenges Under the Criminal Act, quasi-rape is punishable by a minimum of two years' imprisonment and typically proceeds to formal prosecution under sentencing guidelines. The client, who was preparing for mandatory military service, would have had to attend trial in civilian court during his military service. Given the circumstances, a suspended sentence following trial appeared likely. 3. Our Arguments and Role After consulting with the client and his family, we identified several mitigating factors: - The client was a first-time offender and a university student; - He immediately apologized to the victim after the incident; - A substantial settlement was reached with the victim; - The client showed sincere remorse; - He voluntarily took a leave of absence from school and planned to enlist in the military to avoid further contact with the victim; - He was an academically outstanding student; - The incident occurred impulsively under the influence of alcohol while the client had a romantic interest in the victim; and - Circumstances before and after the incident indicated that the victim had seemingly forgiven the client shortly afterward. We submitted a detailed legal opinion and supporting evidence to the prosecution, emphasizing these mitigating circumstances and appealing for leniency. The prosecution confirmed the victim's intention not to pursue punishment and, after reviewing the case with the Prosecution Citizen Committee, issued a disposition of suspension of indictment conditioned on the client completing a sexual misconduct education program.
2025. 06. 27
[Civil Litigation] Barun Law Secured a Reversal and Remand Judgment from the Supreme Court Confirming that a Husband and Wife, as Indivisible Co-Creditors, May Each Pursue Compulsory Execution
1. Case Overview a. Party Represented by Barun Law: The defendant, a creditor who participated in a distribution proceeding by obtaining an order for attachment and collection based on a notarial deed of a promissory note. b. Background of the Case: While the wife had already initiated compulsory execution based on a payment order obtained through a loan agreement with the debtor company, the husband separately received a notarial deed for a promissory note for the same loan amount from the debtor company and pursued enforcement. The plaintiffs argued that the promissory note issued to the husband was a sham transaction and thus invalid. The appellate court accepted this argument, overturned the trial court's decision, and ruled in favor of the plaintiffs. However, given that there were several related distribution objection cases pending between the plaintiffs and the defendant, affirming this decision would have caused significant losses for the defendant. c. Litigation: The defendant filed an appeal to the Supreme Court, arguing that the appellate decision was based on factual misapprehension and a misunderstanding of legal principles. 2. Judgment The Supreme Court found that, considering the marital relationship between the husband and wife, the motivation and context of the promissory note, and the true intent of the parties, there was sufficient ground to view the husband and wife as indivisible co-creditors. Therefore, either the husband or wife could validly receive repayment from the debtor company. Based on this reasoning, the Supreme Court reversed the appellate court's decision regarding the defendant and remanded the case for further proceedings. 3. Legal Basis for the Judgment The Supreme Court accepted our argument that the discrepancy in the year stated on the loan agreement was merely a clerical error. Taking into account the totality of the circumstances, the Court held that there was substantial basis to recognize the husband and wife as indivisible co-creditors. 4. Our Arguments and Role Barun Law demonstrated that the date discrepancy in the loan agreement, which had been a central basis for the lower court’s finding of a sham transaction, was in fact a simple clerical error. We further established that: - The husband and wife executed the loan agreement with the debtor company designating the wife as the creditor; - They jointly provided KRW 1 billion to the debtor company; - The promissory note was issued with the husband as payee pursuant to an agreement among the debtor company, the husband, and the wife, as part of the repayment arrangement under the loan agreement. We argued that the appellate court had committed factual and legal errors and diligently presented the same arguments and evidence in the lower court's related cases, obtaining favorable judgments that were submitted as reference materials to the Supreme Court. In addition, we ensured that a related high court case—where the client had prevailed against the plaintiffs—was assigned to the same panel via the plaintiffs' appeal, allowing both cases to be considered together. 5. Significance of the Judgment When the plaintiffs claimed that the husband's promissory note was a sham transaction because it duplicated the amount already enforced by the wife, the appellate court accepted this claim without recognizing the clerical error in the loan agreement's date. The Supreme Court's decision reaffirmed that the husband and wife were indivisible co-creditors and could each pursue separate enforcement actions. This ruling confirms that, in cases involving spouses who operate as a joint economic unit, it is not unlawful for each to obtain a separate enforceable title for the same claim and pursue independent enforcement. The decision serves as a valuable precedent in practical matters such as distribution proceedings.
2025. 06. 27
