Press

According to data released by Forest of Innovation, a startup analysis company, the domestic fortune-telling market is estimated to be worth about 1.4 trillion won. Also, recently, it is said that fortune telling using AI, such as ChatGPT, is gaining great popularity, especially among the younger generation. Quite a few people are very interested in fortune telling. The problem arises when one is too ‘serious’ about fortune-telling. This is because excessive sincerity usually leads to excessive spending. There are many different types, from cases where amulets cost as little as a few hundred thousand won to cases where hundreds of millions of won are spent on so-called exorcism values. Since the amount of money involved is large, conflicts often arise. Most customers complain about why things don't work out even though they invested a lot of money believing the fortune teller's advice. And these conflicts quite often lead to legal disputes. It recently led to the acquittal of a shaman client in his 40s. He was investigated by the police on charges of swindling about 200 million won from customers in the name of a ritual. The customer complained of injustice. He was told by the client, “If you don’t perform a ritual, your business won’t go well,” and was deceived into giving him money. However, the police did not admit the charges. The reason was that there was no evidence that the client had made a statement such as "You have to borrow money to receive the ritual," and that the customer had been informed in advance that refunds were not possible. In addition, it was judged that it would be difficult to apply fraud charges simply because the client had been living as a shaman for a considerable period of time and the effect of the exorcism had not appeared. There are other cases as well. Another shaman in his 50s appeared in court as a defendant. He was also accused of inducing payment from customers who visited his shrine, saying he would perform a ritual for them. The money given by customers amounted to tens of millions of won. The shaman did not back down from his position that “the guest voluntarily chose the exorcism.” What was the court’s decision? The shaman in question was sentenced to probation. It means that the crime has been admitted. The court explained, “Proposing a ritual by citing specific examples, such as saying that a family member will die if the ritual is not performed immediately, can be viewed as an ‘act of deception.’” He also added, "The shaman's yelling at the guest and making him raise his card limit even though there was no reason to rush the exorcism was beyond the acceptable limit as a religious act." In this way, the shaman's actions may be considered 'religious advice' depending on the situation, but they can also be considered 'property misappropriation'. And the key to determining this is 'whether the shaman's actions meet the requirements for fraud.' In the case of fraud, a deceptive act that deceives the other party, an act of disposition by which the victim transfers property as a result, actual damage to property, and an intention to obtain money illegally (intent to take someone else's money from the beginning) are required to be established. If the shaman's words are merely comforting or religious remarks, it is difficult to consider this as deception. However, if the intention was to extort money by inciting fear without a clear basis and repeatedly inducing large payments, there is a risk of being punished for fraud. Even if the victim voluntarily handed over the money, if the cause was deception, that is, deception, fraud can be established. The issue is how the shaman persuaded the victim and what state of mind the victim was in when he or she paid the money. To prevent such disputes, it is essential to record the content during the consultation or keep records such as text messages and account details. In addition, if there is an excessive demand for money, it is necessary to immediately seek legal assistance from an expert. Small Business Team[View full article] Shaman fraud, guilty or not guilty depending on voluntary interpretation (Shortcut)

It was confirmed on the 9th that the police had begun an investigation into SK Telecom (SKT) CEO Yoo Young-sang, who was sued and accused in the aftermath of the unprecedented SIM information hacking incident. As a result of coverage by CBS Nocut News on this day, Seoul Namdaemun Police Station recently arrested CEO Yoo on charges of obstruction of official duties by breach of trust and hierarchy. It has been booked and is being investigated. On the 1st, Daeryun Law Firm received a request from a complainant regarding this SIM hacking incident and filed a complaint and complaint against CEO Yoo and the security manager, and the police began an investigation. Regarding CEO Yoo's alleged breach of trust, Daeryun said, "SKT is in a position to handle entrusted affairs such as protecting and managing users' SIM-related information, but has reduced information protection investment costs, etc." and "Although it is possible to predict that information leakage incidents may occur. He claimed, "We will bear the guilt of breach of trust by neglecting administrative duties such as storing and utilizing users' information and maximizing our own profits to obtain property profits." In addition, it was pointed out that CEO Yoo reported the hacking damage late after being aware of it to the authorities, and that he underreported the circumstances of the damage and was also suspected of obstruction of official duties by hierarchy. People Power Party lawmaker Choi Soo-jin, a member of the National Assembly Science, Technology, Information, Broadcasting and Communications Committee (Overseas Defense), said, According to SKT report data obtained from the Korea Internet & Security Agency (KISA), the SKT hacking incident was reported at 4:46 pm on the 20th of last month. However, controversy over late reporting arose as it was revealed that SKT first recognized that some data had been leaked externally at 6:09 p.m. on the 18th, two days before the filing, and internally confirmed that it had been hacked at 11:20 p.m. on the same day. Even though actual hacking was confirmed, suspicions were raised that the incident was underreported due to 'suspicious circumstances'. According to the Information and Communications Network Act, which was revised in August last year, information and communication service providers must report the details of the damage, cause, and response status to the Minister of Science and ICT or the Korea Internet & Security Agency (KISA) within 24 hours after recognizing a cyber infringement incident such as hacking. In relation to this, Daeryun said, "SKT's reporting of the time of false recognition amounted to obstruction of official duties by hierarchy and was a serious violation of the law that hindered the appropriate initial response of government agencies." He pointed out, "KISA has a public obligation to immediately take necessary measures in the event of a hacking incident in accordance with the Information and Communications Network Act, and SKT's hierarchical false report is a clear obstruction to this." The police plan to conduct an investigation into the complaint and accuser on the 15th. It is currently difficult to identify and book SKT security officers who were accused along with CEO Yoo, and it is understood that the plan is to find out during the investigation process. CBS No Cut News Reporter Kim Soo-jeong (ssuk@cbs.co.kr)[View full article] Nocut News - [Exclusive] Accusation of ‘SIM hacking’… Police begin investigation into SKT CEO Yoo Young-sang (Click here) Hankyoreh - Police begin investigation into ‘SKT hacking incident’, CEO Yoo Young-sang… “Suspicion of breach of trust, etc.” (Shortcut) Newsis - Aftermath of ‘SIM hacking’… Police begin investigation into SKT CEO Yoo Young-sang (Click here) Yonhap News TV - Police book SKT CEO Yoo Young-sang in connection with ‘SIM hacking’ (link) MBC - Police begin investigation into the case of SKT CEO Yoo Young-sang accusing him of ‘USIM hacking’ (Click here) The Fact - Police investigate SKT CEO Yoo Young-sang for 'USIM hacking' (link) Seoul Economic Daily - Police investigate SK Telecom CEO Yoo Yeong-sang in relation to ‘USIM hacking’ (Go here) Edaily - Police make all-out efforts to investigate ‘SIM hacking’… Chairman Chey Tae-won is also included in the investigation (link) Chosun Biz - Police are tracking IP hacked by SKT... Chairman Choi was also accused of violating the Orthodox Network Act (link) POSJOURNAL - Police begin investigation into SKT management..."Allegations of late reporting of hacking, etc." (Shortcut) New Daily - Police begin investigation into management of 'SKT SIM incident'... “Suspicion of breach of trust in business” (link)

A man in his 40s who was handed over to the prosecution on charges of starting a fire by throwing away a cigarette butt was cleared of charges. On March 21, the Goyang Branch of the Uijeongbu District Prosecutors' Office decided not to indict Mr. A, a man in his 40s who was transferred on charges of causing a fire. Last year, Mr. A was accused of starting a fire in a pile of trash by smoking a cigarette inside the house and then throwing a butt out the window without extinguishing the flame. The fire caused property damage worth about 200 million won, including burning cars parked nearby and structures including the interior and exterior walls of the building. The police forwarded the case to the prosecution for reasons such as the fact that the cigarette that Mr. A was smoking was the same as the type of butt found at the fire scene. Mr. A denied the charges, saying, “I usually smoke inside the house, but I did not smoke near the window on the day of the incident.” He emphasized, “Because we know that there are usually piles of trash on the first floor, there is no reason to throw lit cigarette butts out the window due to the possibility of fire.” Considering that the suspect's residence is located above the scene of the ignition and cigarette smoke was confirmed on CCTV, the prosecution ruled that Mr. A may be the owner of the butt that caused the ignition, but decided that it was not possible to confirm exactly where the butt fell, so they decided not to indict him. In addition, there was a smoker in another room of the same building at the time of the fire, so there was no evidence to confirm that Mr. A was the owner of the butt. Choi Seong-ho, an attorney at Daeryun Law Firm, said, “In order for a crime to be recognized in a criminal case, evidence that is convincing beyond reasonable doubt is needed. There is no data showing that Mr. A threw away the cigarette butt, and he was able to avoid prosecution by raising the possibility that the butt that someone else smoked was blown away by the wind.” Reporter Jeong Cheol-wook[View full article] Songchi, a man in his 40s, suffered 200 million won in damages by throwing away cigarette butts... Prosecutors decline to indict due to lack of evidence (link)

A mother who handed over her newborn to someone else through an adoption cafe right after giving birth was investigated for the first time in over 10 years, but was eventually cleared of charges. According to the legal community on the 9th, the Seoul Southern District Prosecutors' Office decided not to indict Mr. A, in his 30s, who was charged with child abandonment and neglect under the Child Welfare Act in March. Mr. A is accused of handing over the child to another person without proper protection after giving birth in 2013. The birth record is However, the investigation began with a report from a local community center employee who was suspicious that the birth had not been registered for over 10 years. Mr. A admitted that he handed over the child. However, he lost contact with the child's biological father at the time and claimed that he made this choice because he was concerned that the adoption record would remain on his birth certificate if he went through formal adoption procedures. At the time, he posted a post on an adoption cafe and was contacted by an infertile couple living overseas, and after meeting with them several times, he handed over the child. The prosecution decided not to file an indictment. Although it is true that Mr. A handed over the child without formal procedures, it is difficult to recognize the intentionality of child abandonment and neglect. The prosecution explained, "Under the Child Welfare Act, neglect must be recognized as causing damage equivalent to abandonment and physical and emotional abuse, but Mr. He added. Attorney Park Seong-dong of Daeryun Law Firm, who represented Mr. A, said, "Mr. A thought about the child's future from various angles even in difficult situations, including meeting and talking with the couple who expressed their intention to adopt 5 to 6 times. We were able to achieve a good result by emphasizing that, regardless of moral validity, the establishment of a crime must be judged strictly." Jeong Eui-jin (jej88@ikbc.co.kr)[View full article] Mother in her 20s who gave birth to a newborn...No charges found in investigation after 10 years (Shortcut)

The defendant, who disobeyed the summary order, filed for trial directly and was acquitted. “Requests to confirm the truth about candidates for public office are not for slander purposes.” A man who had been indicted for defamation for posting suspicions surrounding a city council member candidate on a bulletin board was acquitted in court. On the 8th, the Suwon District Court acquitted Mr. A, a man in his 50s, who had been indicted for posting false information about a candidate running in the 2022 city council election on the Internet. Mr. A was sentenced on March 13. He was handed over to trial on charges of violating the Act on Promotion of Information and Communications Network Utilization and Information Protection (defamation). At the time, it was confirmed that Mr. A had posted on the Internet and personal SNS about the academic background and suspicion of abuse of power by Mr. B, who was a candidate for city council. The prosecution and the court determined that Mr. A was guilty of defamation and requested a summary order of 50 million won in fines, but Mr. A objected and requested a formal trial. At the trial, Mr. A claimed that he only posted a post requesting verification of the candidate's qualifications and that it was for the public interest, not for the purpose of malicious or aggressive defamation. Accordingly, the court ruled, "When looking at the defendant's post, he was requesting investigation and verification of the matter and there was no malicious attack." In addition, it acknowledged the public interest of Mr. A's actions, saying, "Whether or not the victim's academic background, who was an election candidate, was false is a subject of public interest," and the public interest of Mr. A's actions. Daeryun Law Firm, which represented Mr. A, said, "An act of publicly revealing facts for the purpose of slander is a crime of defamation, but if the facts concern the public interest, the purpose of slander is denied." The client (Mr. “It was not acknowledged,” he explained. Intern reporter Jeong Ye-eun (ye9@kyeonggi.com)[View full article] “It’s not for slander”… City council candidate in his 50s, not guilty for posting false information (link)

Remarks about being forced to hug and kiss... Victim: “The defendant shows no remorse. Please be severely punished.” The court said, “The defendant asks the victim to ‘act like a victim’… It is difficult to believe that he is truly remorseful.” A boss who molested a subordinate at a company dinner was sentenced to prison. On March 27, the Daejeon District Court sentenced Mr. A, a man in his 40s, to six months in prison on charges of forcible harassment. In addition, he was ordered to complete a 40-hour sexual violence treatment program. Mr. A was accused of forcibly hugging and sexually harassing his subordinate, Mr. B, at a company dinner last year. The court said, “The defendant not only molested the victim, but also regarded the victim as a sexual object and made obscene remarks about the victim to other team members,” and added, “It is difficult to say that he is truly remorseful by demanding that the victim act like a victim.” In addition, “The defendant made a surprise deposit the day before sentencing. He added, “We also took into account the fact that the victim refused to accept the receipt and is pleading for severe punishment.” Attorney Kim Jeong-beom of Daeryun Law Firm, who represented Mr. B in this case, said, “Mr. B had the courage to raise the issue of sexual harassment within the company, but was disadvantaged, including discrimination, and eventually suffered secondary damage by being unfairly dismissed.” Attorney Kim added, “During the trial, Mr. A did not even give a proper apology and said, ‘It is not a big deal, but the victim is making a fuss.’ “He showed a lack of remorse,” he explained. “It appears that the court also took this into consideration when sentencing him to prison.” Reporter Kim Jong-cheol (jckim99@sportsseoul.com)[View full article] The victim was fired after being sexually harassed at a company dinner... Court: “Defendant shows no remorse” sentenced to 6 months in prison (link)

The Seoul Central District Prosecutors' Office and a lawyer with experience as a trial researcher at the Supreme Court announced on the 8th that Daeryun Law Firm (Kook-il Kim and Byeong-jun Ko, Managing Director Attorneys) plans to closely respond to the increasing number of medium-to-large cases by launching a special execution division ('Special Division') to increase case processing expertise and efficiency with the Litigation Management Headquarters. Daeryun Law Firm's Special Division is responsible for carrying out (led by the division) medium-to-large cases that are difficult to respond to at the individual group level. The organization consists of Special Department 1 (Civil and Administrative) and Special Department 2 (Criminal). Daeryun Law Firm says, “The Special Department system presents a new direction in handling medium to large-sized cases. Together with the recently established Litigation Management Headquarters, it is a strategy to maximize the expertise and efficiency of case handling,” and “Rather than simply ‘increasing the number of people’ and randomly assigning lawyers, the head of the division organizes lawyers specializing in each field to manage medium to large-sized cases. “We can build a system,” he explained. Attorney Young-gon Cho (16th Judicial Research and Training Institute) serves as the head of the Special Department and the head of the Special Department 2, leading the entire group. Attorney Cho, who served as Chief of the Seoul Central District Prosecutors' Office and Chief of the Daegu District Prosecutors' Office, took on major cases such as the investigation of the Four Major Rivers Project and the recovery of fines from former Presidents Chun Doo-hwan and Roh Tae-woo when he was Chief Prosecutor, and was equipped with legal advice and investigative response to numerous companies, including unfair trade practices of leading domestic and foreign companies. The first special department head is Attorney Sang-won Yeo (Judicial Research and Training Institute), who served as Chief Judge of the Seoul Central District Court and the Seoul Eastern District Court. 17th class) is responsible. Attorney Yeo, who has been in public service as a judge for 23 years, will lead the civil affairs group based on her experience as a trial researcher at the Supreme Court and as a Korean commercial arbitrator. The standing attorneys are Ui-seok Lee (6th trial), a real estate lawyer and expropriation and compensation lawyer at the Korean Bar Association, and Myeong-cheol Kim (47th class of the Judicial Research and Training Institute), who represented an ‘Incheon investment tycoon’ in a 67 billion won fraud case, respectively, taking charge of civil administration and criminal cases. Support. The launch of Daeryun Law Firm’s Special Department is significant in that it carries out the entire litigation process, from ‘consultation-distribution-management’, with professional lawyers. If a case is classified as a medium or large-scale case, the Special Action Headquarters responds after consultation is conducted by a lawyer specializing in counseling within the Litigation Management Headquarters, which Daeryun launched last month. Recent cases that the Daeryun Special Department is responding to include △ A dispute over construction costs by an apartment complex reconstruction association, △ Virtual currency group fraud damage, and △ Large construction company B's unfair debt dispute. Regarding the Apartment A case, Director Cho explained the strategy, saying, “Constructors often avoid construction cost disputes by ‘taking time,’” and “Daeryun minimizes the burden on union members through the process of ‘contract review → request for evidence → analysis of negotiation structure → response to termination.’” Regarding the future direction of the special department, Attorney Cho chose ‘legal activism.’ Attorney Cho said, “The purpose of the special department is not just to represent litigation, but to diagnose the risk structure before a problem occurs.” He added, “The goal is not only to minimize the spread of damage, but ultimately to come up with a plan to improve the system.” Kim Kook-il, CEO of Daeryun Law Firm, said, “In the case of medium to large cases, multiple cases are often merged, so it is important that lawyers with specialized knowledge are brought in at the same time.” He added, “A legal expert with nearly 40 years of experience in the legal field. “Because the team is led by ‘veterans’, we are able to provide clear strategies and direction to our clients,” he said. Law Leader Reporter Son Dong-wook twson@lawleader.co.kr Law Leader - 40-year legal veteran leads medium to large-scale cases... Daeryun Law Firm launches Special Action Headquarters (Go here) Korea Economic Daily - A 40-year legal veteran leads medium to large-scale cases... Daeryun, launch of special execution headquarters (link) Korea Economic Daily - Dae-ryun establishes a special department within the law firm (link)

Daeryun Law Firm: “Security and reliability must be thoroughly secured” An era has begun where patients can directly manage and utilize their medical records and health information. This is because the ‘right to request transmission of personal information’ system was implemented in earnest following the enforcement of the revised ‘Personal Information Protection Act’ in March. Legal experts advised that a technical and management system must be established as a major change has begun in the data flow between medical institutions and patients. On the 7th, Daeryun Law Firm introduced the systems that companies and institutions must have through a corporate and implications report on the revised personal information processing policy guidelines. The 'right to request transmission of personal information' is the right of the information subject to request that his or her personal information be transmitted to him or her or a third party, and the 'right to data portability' stipulated in the European Union's (EU) General Data Protection Regulation (GDPR) is adapted to domestic circumstances. This system was introduced. This system is a key axis of the 'My Data' policy that ensures that individuals can independently integrate and utilize their information on various platforms, and is being applied sequentially in sensitive information fields such as medical care, communications, and finance. Among them, the medical field is one of the core application areas of this system, and it is believed that it could have a significant impact on the future medical treatment and health management system. With the implementation of this system, patients will be able to use the Korea Disease Control and Prevention Agency, National Health Insurance Service, Health Insurance Review and Assessment Service, and tertiary general hospitals. Vaccination records, health checkup results, medical treatment details, medication history, diagnosis information, etc., which were distributed across public and private institutions, can be received directly or transmitted to the desired institution or platform. This makes it possible to transfer medical records between hospitals as well as integrated health management through the personal health record (PHR) platform. The Personal Information Protection Committee is expanding the scope of My Data application to the medical field, communications, energy, etc., and plans to establish a more solid institutional foundation for medical information transmission by 2026. Transmission of personal information must be done through a specialized intermediary agency, and is only permitted through encryption and API methods. Scraping methods are prohibited, and medical data is stored and utilized through specialized 'specialized organizations'. However, information that can be transmitted is limited to information provided by the information subject or created through activities, and data (risk prediction, profiling results, etc.) analyzed and processed by the hospital itself is, in principle, not included in the transmission target. Exceptionally, diagnostic information can be transmitted under the Medical Service Act. Officials predict that the institutionalization of the right to request personal information transmission in medical settings will not only establish patient-centered health information sovereignty, but will also become the basis for precision medicine and customized health management services in the future. Daeryun Law Firm said, "A patient-centered medical data utilization system has begun," and added, "Medical institutions such as general hospitals must thoroughly ensure the security and reliability of the data transmission process, considering the nature of handling sensitive personal information." He continued, "PHR. He added, “Platforms and digital healthcare companies, as recipients of transmitted data, must also meet the My Data registration requirements and have a technical and management system that guarantees the rights of information subjects.” Meanwhile, as the My Data project is recently on track, the government is also preparing specific guidelines for the transmission of My Data personal information. On the 6th, the Personal Information Protection Committee published the 'Guide to the MyData Personal Information Transmission Request System in All Fields', a draft of which was released in March last year and collected opinions.[View full article] “Medical information is now carried by patients”... Full-fledged implementation of transmission request rights (click here)

A hair shop employee who was sent to the prosecution on charges of making unfair profits by using customer information after moving to a competitor company was not indicted. On March 18, the Cheonan Branch of the Daejeon District Prosecutors' Office dismissed employee A, who was accused of violating the Unfair Competition Prevention and Trade Secret Protection Act (Unfair Competition Prevention Act), with 'no charges'. It was disposed of. Mr. A worked as a designer at a franchise beauty salon in July of last year, but when he moved to a competitor, he is accused of stealing trade secrets, including customer lists, and using them for business activities. The company filed a complaint, saying it had suffered enormous losses in business due to Mr. A. The purpose is that Mr. A contacted customers and induced them to refund their memberships. According to Article 18, Paragraph 2 of the Unfair Competition Prevention Act, if a company's trade secrets are leaked to the outside world, you can be punished by imprisonment for up to 10 years or a fine of up to 500 million won. Mr. A denied all charges. It is claimed that the customers contacted Mr. A voluntarily and that he never induced them to move the hair salon during this process. The prosecution decided that the charges were not admissible. The prosecution said, “It is acknowledged that Mr. A used information he learned while working after leaving the company, but it cannot be said that he used the trade secret for the purpose of causing damage to the company, considering that a customer he was previously in contact with contacted Mr. A first.” Attorney Kim Hyun-soo of Daeryun Law Firm, who represented Mr. A, said, “Trade secret infringement occurs when the trade secret is acquired and used for the purpose of making unfair profits through the trade secret or causing damage to the holder of the trade secret.” “It applies,” he explained, adding, “We were able to receive a non-indictment decision thanks to the fact that it was not confirmed that Mr. A persuaded or instructed customers to refund.” Digital Content Team[View full article] Hair shop designer accused of stealing customer information from former company... Prosecution: “Not indicted” (Shortcut)

A doctor who was suspected of issuing false receipts to patients and stealing insurance money has been cleared of the charges. Dongtan Police Station in Hwaseong, Gyeonggi Province, decided not to forward Mr. A, a doctor who was booked on charges of violating the Special Act on Prevention of Insurance Fraud last March. Mr. A is accused of issuing receipts with false medical expenses to patients for three years since 2019 and collecting 800 million won in actual insurance money based on these. The insurance company requested the police to investigate, saying that Mr. A issued receipts without performing surgery and caused patients to make false insurance claims. However, Mr. A denied the charges, saying, “Patients who were burdened with surgery costs had difficulty paying in full, so we first cut off the receipt so that they could pay only a portion of the surgery fee in advance and pay the remaining amount after receiving the insurance money.” The police determined that Mr. A was not guilty. A police official said, “The suspect received insurance money from patients as surgical expenses.” “The facts are acknowledged,” he said, but “except for the false receipt, the other documents, including the surgery confirmation, were written truthfully.” He also said, “There are no circumstances of forcing or inducing patients to undergo surgery, and there is no confirmation of conspiring to commit a crime.” He also ruled, “It cannot be considered that the insurance company was deceived.” Lawyer So-young Yoon of Daeryun Law Firm, who was in charge of Mr. “An insurance claim cannot be considered false just because payment has not been completed,” he explained. Jeong Eui-jin (jej88@ikbc.co.kr)[View full article] “I issued a false receipt”…Doctor booked for insurance fraud ‘not guilty’ (Shortcut)